On 18.03.2009 12:12 Uhr, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Stefan Reinauer wrote:
>
>> +++ i386/coreboot.c (working copy)
>>
> ..
>
>> + case CB_TAG_FORWARD:
>> + return cb_parse_header((void *)(unsigned long)((struct
>> cb_forward *)rec)->forward, len, info);
>> + continue;
>>
>
> Are these semantics correct? Will this recurse? Should it also
> continue parsing after a forward tag?
>
> I guess we should have decided on these things before committing
> but.. :)
>
My word is code decides, not the comitee ;-)
> If the intent is to never have more than one forward tag and never
> have anything but the forward tag in one table if there is a forward
> tag at all I think we should at least document it but ideally codify
> it, so that we don't end up with a situation where someone tries to
> "misuse" the structures, or fail to parse them?
Unless someone else is going to create a Firmware that produces a
coreboot table in a different way than it is right now, we might want to
revisit. In the current scenario this would merely be academic.
Stefan
--
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: [email protected] • http://www.coresystems.de/
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866
--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
