Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] efi: implement generic support for the Memory Attributes table

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 11 Apr, at 04:09:11PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> 
> The spec does not actually mandate that, and I do know that the
> Tianocore code deliberately uses a larger value for desc_size in
> GetMemoryMap() to catch inadvertent uses of sizeof(). I am not sure if
> the memory attribute table code does the same, and it seems dangerous
> to assume that to be the case in general.
 
The spec may not mandate that, but this code will explode horribly if
efi_memory_desc_t does not accurately describe the entries in either
the EFI Memory Attributes table or the EFI memory map.

How do we ensure that doing,

static bool entry_is_valid(...)
{
	*out = *in;
	...

keeps working? Are we using the table version to guarantee that?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux