Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > > Can you explain what, if any, effect this bug had or could have > > had in practice? > > Sure. > 1.) If gcc had decided to reload bist from stack after initializing the > global variable pointer, bist would have been nonzero, an indicator for > processor failure. > 2.) If gcc had decided to use the stack location of bist as a scratch > register (and it probably is free to do so as long as the contents are > restored before returning), it would have clobbered the global variable > pointer, leading to NULL pointer dereferences. > 3.) Any accesses to init_detected would have resulted in accessing 4 > bytes above the top of stack (0x87ffc-0x87fff), something the rest of > the code deliberately avoids.
Thanks! If you add the above to the commit message I say: Acked-by: Peter Stuge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
