Hi Jerry, On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 16:19:55 -0600, Jerry Hoemann wrote: > Address an incompatible change to record type 237. Field in offest 0x09
"offset" ;-) > changed from a STRING to a WORD date. This causes the decode of these > records to display <BAD INDEX>. > > The patch addresses both forms of the record. This is accomplished based > upon size of the field in offest 0x09. You can't actually detect the size of a field in a DMI record. The only size you can check is the size of the record itself (and your patch is doing exactly that). > AFAIK, the version of record type 237 that is currently implemented in > dmidecode never made it outside of HPE. So, patch addressing both forms > might be overkill. I have implemented and tested a more straightforward > change to the decoding of the record based upon its new definition. > So, please let me know if you want the simpler fix. Indeed, in my large collection of DMI tables, which includes a good number of HP(E) systems thanks to you, I see type 237 records of size 8, 9 and 11 but not 10. So I'd be happy to take the simpler fix in the name of, well, simplicity. Unless it somehow makes your life easier if dmidecode supports both. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support
