linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] dmi_scan_machine uses uninitialized address on x86 / EFI

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <49A462BD.7010205@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:12:29 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Thomas Jourdan <tjourdan@...erfaceconcept.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] dmi_scan_machine uses uninitialized address on x86 / EFI

Thomas Jourdan wrote:
> 
> On x86/EFI platforms, if efi_enabled is true, the dmi_scan_machine function
> fails, even if valid DMI table is present. In the setup_arch function,
> efi_init is called after dmi_scan_machine. But this is efi_init which will
> initialize the smbios address, needed by dmi_scan_machine.
> 
> This leads to dmi_scan_machine ioremapping physical address 0, instead of
> the address provided by the EFI system table. The following patch fixes the
> problem.
> 

Hi Thomas,

What is the concrete manifestation of the bug (i.e. how critical is it?)
 We are late in the 2.6.29-rc cycle, and this patch seems to have some
risk associated with it.

Huang, Peter, Yinghai: any opinions?

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/