Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "0xffff0".
Did you mean:
0xffff
2008 Jun 24
2
Debugging
...e i8086
(gdb) target remote localhost:1234
Remote debugging using localhost:1234
0x0000fff0 in ?? () at localboot.inc:68
68 jmp kaboom ; If we returned, oh boy...
How does "jmp kaboom" get here? We are at the BIOS entry point:
(gdb) display/10i $cs*16+$eip
1: x/10i $cs * 16 + $eip
0xffff0: ljmp $0xf000,$0xe05b
[...]
(gdb) info symbol 0x7c00
bootsec in section .text
(gdb) b bootsec
Note: breakpoint -2 also set at pc 0x7c00.
Breakpoint 1 at 0x7c00: file extlinux.asm, line 146.
Breakpoint -2? That's new for me. Anyway:
(gdb) c
Continuing.
^C
Program received signal SIGINT, In...
2011 May 26
2
virtual bios question
...or qemu-dm?I have traced the codes flow
and found qemu-dm run before hvmloader,right?
And virtual bios code are both in hvmloader and qemu-dm, but I think it
should be only one of virtual bios
will be used to initialize the virutal device in qemu-dm.I find at the end
of hvmloader it will jmp to 0xffff0, that is the bios entry,so I think the
virtual bios in hvmloader will function. But how qemu-dm ingore the
execution of its virual bios inside?
Any one help me? Thanks.
--
View this message in context: http://xen.1045712.n5.nabble.com/virtual-bios-question-tp4427579p4427579.html
Sent from the...
2007 Apr 18
1
Handling PCI/ROM space
...atic struct pci_raw_ops * __devinit pci_find_bios(void)
{
- union bios32 *check;
+ union bios32 *check, sig;
unsigned char sum;
int i, length;
@@ -314,6 +315,10 @@ static struct pci_raw_ops * __devinit pc
for (check = (union bios32 *) __va(0xe0000);
check <= (union bios32 *) __va(0xffff0);
++check) {
+ long sig;
+ if (__get_user(sig, &check->fields.signature))
+ continue;
+
if (check->fields.signature != BIOS32_SIGNATURE)
continue;
length = check->fields.length * 16;
Does this seem reasonable, or should there be some other fix?
J
2007 Apr 18
1
Handling PCI/ROM space
...atic struct pci_raw_ops * __devinit pci_find_bios(void)
{
- union bios32 *check;
+ union bios32 *check, sig;
unsigned char sum;
int i, length;
@@ -314,6 +315,10 @@ static struct pci_raw_ops * __devinit pc
for (check = (union bios32 *) __va(0xe0000);
check <= (union bios32 *) __va(0xffff0);
++check) {
+ long sig;
+ if (__get_user(sig, &check->fields.signature))
+ continue;
+
if (check->fields.signature != BIOS32_SIGNATURE)
continue;
length = check->fields.length * 16;
Does this seem reasonable, or should there be some other fix?
J
2007 Apr 18
2
[PATCH 1/4] Prep for paravirt: move pagetable includes.
Move header includes for the nopud / nopmd types to the location of the
actual pte / pgd type definitions. This allows generic 4-level page
type code to be written before the split 2/3 level page table headers are
included.
Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
2007 Apr 18
2
[PATCH 1/4] Prep for paravirt: move pagetable includes.
Move header includes for the nopud / nopmd types to the location of the
actual pte / pgd type definitions. This allows generic 4-level page
type code to be written before the split 2/3 level page table headers are
included.
Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>