Change in flashrom[master]: SFDP: drop static table length check to make newer SFDP revisions work

[Michael Niewöhner (Code Review)]

Attention is currently required from: Edward O'Callaghan, Felix Singer, Nico Huber, Angel Pons, Anastasia Klimchuk.
Michael Niewöhner has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055 )

Change subject: SFDP: drop static table length check to make newer SFDP revisions work
......................................................................

Patch Set 2:

(2 comments)

Commit Message:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055/comment/6d591bd3_6b636547 
PS1, Line 28: ***RFC*** We could maintain a list of revisions/lengths but is it really
            : worth it?
            :
> What is the price of a false-positive (length is wrong, but execution continues)?

Good question. I think there are three cases:
1) read error -> execution will continue just fine
2) defective chip
3) manufacturing/design error

In any case a wrong value could also happen later during read of the table values and we wouldn't even know bc there are no checksums/parity.

File sfdp.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055/comment/f4182ef6_ba500326 
PS2, Line 372: } else if (sfdp_fill_flash(flash->chip, tbuf, len) == 0)
> Oh so length of table was checked twice?

yes