Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:03:57 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] x86: check for and defend against BIOS memory corruption |
| |
Hugh Dickins wrote: > > hpa introduced the 64k idea, and we've all been repeating it; > but I've not heard the reasoning behind it. Is it a fundamental > addressing limitation within the BIOS memory model? Or a case > that Windows treats the bottom 64k as scratch, so BIOS testers > won't notice if they corrupt it? >
I should point out that I have seen one particular bug quite a few times poking around with boot loaders: the BIOS accesses memory at an otherwise valid address, but with the segment base set to either zero or 0x400 instead of whatever it should have been.
-hpa
| |