[coreboot] LAR walking madness

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Wed Jan 16 23:12:08 CET 2008

On 16.01.2008 18:53, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> On 16/01/08 10:41 -0700, Marc Jones wrote:
>> ron minnich wrote:
>>> It seems like you've added two slightly more complicated ways to do
>>> things where one simple one would have done: an end-of-entries LAR
>>> header. Limiting payload segments to two is going to cause us trouble
>>> now and forever, I think. And I'd still like to have a microcode/
>>> directory, and a rom/ directory, each with an undefined # of entries.
>>> I think the LAR is going to be used in the future in ways we can not
>>> imagine now. So solving those two cases won't help future uses.
>> I agree. I would like to use the LAR for microcode and for Geode VSA for 
>> starters.
> Not to pile on, but I agree 100%.
> The problem is that we've demonstrated conclusively in v2 that understanding
> arbitrary blobs of non-payload data is mandatory for nearly architecture
> we deal with. The initial design of LAR allowed for unlimited and arbitrary
> blobs (either through careful design or luck).  If now the limitations of LAR
> are starting to outweigh the benefits, then we either have to account for
> them, or scratch LAR and start over.

OK, so you both say a full walk is OK as long as it doesn't take too long?

Then we're indeed back to either an end-of-entries LAR member or a
placeholder LAR member.


More information about the coreboot mailing list