Re: What kind of code might generate amd64 addressses like 0xFFFFF80000000007 or be based on 0xFFFFF80000000000 ?
- Reply: Mark Millard : "Re: What kind of code might generate amd64 addressses like 0xFFFFF80000000007 or be based on 0xFFFFF80000000000 ?"
- In reply to: Mark Millard : "What kind of code might generate amd64 addressses like 0xFFFFF80000000007 or be based on 0xFFFFF80000000000 ?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 04:13:45 UTC
Hi Mark, > On 16 Dec 2024, at 10:33, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267028 is for a crash problem > someone has been having over more than 2 years. There are boot time crashes > involved. > > It appears that 0xFFFFF80000000007 is showing up in use and stored in data > structures as a pointer value in fields/arguments that are pointers, where such > a special value would not be expected. Later defrerencing does not go well, at > least when the dererefenced data is then in-turn put to use. > > The small offset from 0xFFFFF80000000000 suggests to me that the special value likely > is inappropriately left around and somehow picked up and used. 0xFFFFF80000000000 (or > near it) might be odd enough to have only a few known likely possible usages. Such > notes in the bugzilla report would be good if such is the case. Thus my question. That value (0xffffffff80000000) is kernbase (see sysctl kern.base_address). However it is hard to think of why that value (or a small offset to it) is getting put in places it shouldn't be.. -- Daniel O'Connor "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum