Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] put coreboot table in high tables area

[Peter Stuge]

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.. :)

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?

//Peter