On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 05:31:36PM -0500, Scott Duplichan wrote:
> Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> ]Still it's not nice to write outside the callers buffer. Another OS
> ]might call same function and SeaBIOS would end up corrupting some
> ]variable. Ungood. I guess memmove() is the only choice?
>
> ]//Pet
Scott Duplichan wrote:
> Another possibility is splitting the request. The caller's buffer
> could handle the bigger part, and a stack buffer could be used for
> the remaining part.
I think this idea is by far the best!
//Peter
___
SeaBIOS mailing lis
Peter Stuge wrote:
]Still it's not nice to write outside the callers buffer. Another OS
]might call same function and SeaBIOS would end up corrupting some
]variable. Ungood. I guess memmove() is the only choice?
]//Peter
I had a couple of ideas for a more sound solution. Debugging them is
a chal
Scott Duplichan wrote:
> ]1) When booting a DOS drive, a disk read error occurs at some point
> ]after autoexec executes.
>
> The revised patch (attached) overcomes this problem. It turns out in
> the latter stage of booting, DOS makes a couple of INT13 read requests
> with a buffer that is not wo
Scott Duplichan wrote:
]1) When booting a DOS drive, a disk read error occurs at some point
]after autoexec executes.
The revised patch (attached) overcomes this problem. It turns out in
the latter stage of booting, DOS makes a couple of INT13 read requests
with a buffer that is not word aligned.
