These should be DMI info ....,
You can backup it and restore it late.
YH
Lu, Yinghai schrieb:
These should be DMI info ....,
The later section (2.2 kb) really are DMI info.
But I strongly doubt that the missing 128 kb in the middle are all DMI info. Especially the fact that here flash_rom reads a consecutive block of 0xff while the vendor BIOS image has real contents seems the wrong way. If it were DMI info, the vendor BIOS image should have the 0xff and not flash_rom.
You can backup it and restore it late.
Thanks for the hint.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
* Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [060412 06:17]:
Lu, Yinghai schrieb:
These should be DMI info ....,
The later section (2.2 kb) really are DMI info.
But I strongly doubt that the missing 128 kb in the middle are all DMI info. Especially the fact that here flash_rom reads a consecutive block of 0xff while the vendor BIOS image has real contents seems the wrong way. If it were DMI info, the vendor BIOS image should have the 0xff and not flash_rom.
What does that content look like?
Stefan
Stefan Reinauer schrieb:
- Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [060412 06:17]:
Lu, Yinghai schrieb:
These should be DMI info ....,
The later section (2.2 kb) really are DMI info.
But I strongly doubt that the missing 128 kb in the middle are all DMI info. Especially the fact that here flash_rom reads a consecutive block of 0xff while the vendor BIOS image has real contents seems the wrong way. If it were DMI info, the vendor BIOS image should have the 0xff and not flash_rom.
What does that content look like?
Looks like valid x86 instructions.
The following archive has both BIOS images (the extracted one and the vendor-suplied one) inside. http://www-ti.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/~hailfing/biosimages.tar.bz2
Regards, Carl-Daniel
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
Stefan Reinauer wrote:
- Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [060412 06:17]:
Lu, Yinghai wrote:
These should be DMI info ....,
The later section (2.2 kb) really are DMI info.
But I strongly doubt that the missing 128 kb in the middle are all DMI info. Especially the fact that here flash_rom reads a consecutive block of 0xff while the vendor BIOS image has real contents seems the wrong way. If it were DMI info, the vendor BIOS image should have the 0xff and not flash_rom.
What does that content look like?
Looks like valid x86 instructions.
I tested with awdflash and the readout of awdflash does not exhibit this bug. Any idea how to fix it in flash_rom?
Regards, Carl-Daniel