coreboot October 2006

coreboot@coreboot.org

53 participants
208 discussions

[LinuxBIOS] indent
by Uwe Hermann 08 Oct '06

08 Oct '06

Hi, out of curiosity I tried running indent on the whole source tree, and then running abuild to see whether things break. Short answer: they do. I used thisîlittle script to indent the code: for f in `find . -name '*.[ch]'`; do indent -kr -i8 -ts8 -sob -l80 -ss -ncs $f done abuild fails because some code will be broken in the process, and some code will still work but look ugly. There are workarounds though, you can enclose paragraphs which should not be touched by indent as follows: /* *INDENT-OFF* */ /* *INDENT-ON* */ I suggest we should agree on some set of parameters for indent, add INDENT-OFF/INDENT-ON to the code where appropriate and then, as soon as abuild doesn't complain anymore, checkin the indented code. New checkins which don't conform to the coding style (and other guidelines which may apply) should not be allowed from that point on. Comments? Uwe. -- Uwe Hermann http://www.hermann-uwe.de http://www.it-services-uh.de | http://www.crazy-hacks.org http://www.holsham-traders.de | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

5 10

[LinuxBIOS] coordinator
by Tyler Pohl 08 Oct '06

08 Oct '06

> Now; this morning we had a discussion about the creation of a > Programmer's manual. The idea is to create much more documentation > for people who want to start hacking on LinuxBIOS. People who > contribute code would ideally also write documentation about that > code - but there might be other contributors too, of course. > > The consensus of the discussion was that we need a coordinator for > the Programmer's manual. Ideally someone who is *not* yet very > familiar with the codebase, or even with low-level programming. > Such a person would basically oversee the creation of the manual, > encouraging (pestering?) coders to also contribute documentation, > etc. It would be a great way to dive into LinuxBIOS programming - > the coordinator is pretty much guaranteed to learn a lot as this > manual takes shape. > > The question is - anyone here who would be interested in taking on > this role? I'm very interested, I just wouldn't know where to start :) Could someone point me in a direction. Tyler Pohl

2 1

[LinuxBIOS] added support sst29sf020
by Tyler Pohl 07 Oct '06

07 Oct '06

I added support to the flashrom source for the sst29sf020. I though i would contribute. Source is attached. P.S. Good coding of the flashrom thank you. Very easy to modify. Tyler Pohl

2 1

[LinuxBIOS] r2450 - trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom
by svn＠openbios.org 07 Oct '06

07 Oct '06

Author: stepan Date: 2006-10-08 00:59:03 +0200 (Sun, 08 Oct 2006) New Revision: 2450 Modified: trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash.h trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flashchips.c Log: here's a small patch to add support for the SST 49LF020A to flashrom. by Uwe Hermann <uwe(a)hermann-uwe.de> X-Signed-Off-By: Stefan Reinauer <stepan(a)coresystems.de> Modified: trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash.h =================================================================== --- trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash.h 2006-10-07 00:23:51 UTC (rev 2449) +++ trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash.h 2006-10-07 22:59:03 UTC (rev 2450) @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ #define SST_39VF020 0xD6 /* SST 39VF020 device */ #define SST_49LF040B 0x50 /* SST 49LF040B device */ #define SST_49LF040 0x51 /* SST 49LF040 device */ +#define SST_49LF020A 0x52 /* SST 49LF020A device */ #define SST_49LF080A 0x5B /* SST 48LF080A device */ #define SST_49LF002A 0x57 /* SST 49LF002A device */ #define SST_49LF003A 0x1B /* SST 49LF003A device */ Modified: trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flashchips.c =================================================================== --- trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flashchips.c 2006-10-07 00:23:51 UTC (rev 2449) +++ trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flashchips.c 2006-10-07 22:59:03 UTC (rev 2450) @@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ {"SST49LF040", SST_ID, SST_49LF040, NULL, 512, 4096, probe_jedec, erase_49lf040, write_49lf040,NULL}, + {"SST49LF020A", SST_ID, SST_49LF020A, NULL, 256, 16 * 1024, + probe_jedec, erase_49lf040, write_49lf040,NULL}, {"SST49LF080A", SST_ID, SST_49LF080A, NULL, 1024, 4096, probe_jedec, erase_49lf040, write_49lf040,NULL}, {"SST49LF002A/B", SST_ID, SST_49LF002A, NULL, 256, 16 * 1024,

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] PATCH: flashrom support for SST 49LF020A.
by Uwe Hermann 07 Oct '06

07 Oct '06

Hi, here's a small patch to add support for the SST 49LF020A to flashrom. I only tested probing and reading the chip, I don't want to test writing, as the chip on my test-board is soldered on. I'm guessing that it should work, though, as it shares most code with some very similar chips. Uwe. -- Uwe Hermann http://www.hermann-uwe.de http://www.it-services-uh.de | http://www.crazy-hacks.org http://www.holsham-traders.de | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

1 0

Re: [LinuxBIOS] FW: rev F support code
by Lu, Yinghai 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

5 7

[LinuxBIOS] LinuxBIOS Symposium 2006 - Slides and Photos
by Stefan Reinauer 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

Hi all, I've added my slides and photos the LinuxBIOS Symposium page at http://www.linuxbios.org/index.php/LinuxBIOS_Symposium_2006 If any of you has slides or photos left, please upload them or let me know so I can upload them for you.. :-) Have a nice weekend Stefan -- coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br. Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613 Email: info(a)coresystems.de • http://www.coresystems.de/

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] flashrom: does writing work on ICH-2 et al?
by Uwe Hermann 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

Hi, I have problems writing flash chips with flashrom on multiple ICH-x boards, e.g. ICH-2 and ICH-4. The code is pretty much the same for all ICH-x so I guess all of them have the problem(?) Detecting and reading from a chip works fine. Writing _seems_ to work fine (no errors, doesn't abort), but when I try to verify (or just read the chip again) I get the same content as before the write. The hardware itself as well as the flash chip is ok, as I can write the chip using Uniflash. Has anybody successfully written any chip on an ICH-x? Is more code needed to make it work? Motherboard-specific code maybe? Uwe. -- Uwe Hermann http://www.hermann-uwe.de http://www.it-services-uh.de | http://www.crazy-hacks.org http://www.holsham-traders.de | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] flashrom SST49LF080A patch
by Roman Kononov 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

Hello, The first patch changes chip erase method from JEDEC Chip Erase to JEDEC Sector Erase for each sector. See the comment in util/flashrom/sst49lf040.c, line #40. Verified on a real SST49LF080A chip, for which JEDEC Chip Erase did not work as well. The second patch makes printf working [as designed]. Roman Index: util/flashrom/flashchips.c =================================================================== --- util/flashrom/flashchips.c (revision 2434) +++ util/flashrom/flashchips.c (working copy) @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ {"SST49LF040", SST_ID, SST_49LF040, NULL, 512, 4096, probe_jedec, erase_49lf040, write_49lf040,NULL}, {"SST49LF080A", SST_ID, SST_49LF080A, NULL, 1024, 4096, - probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_49lf040,NULL}, + probe_jedec, erase_49lf040, write_49lf040,NULL}, {"SST49LF002A/B", SST_ID, SST_49LF002A, NULL, 256, 16 * 1024, probe_sst_fwhub, erase_sst_fwhub, write_sst_fwhub, NULL}, {"SST49LF003A/B", SST_ID, SST_49LF003A, NULL, 384, 64 * 1024, Index: util/flashrom/sst49lf040.c =================================================================== --- util/flashrom/sst49lf040.c (revision 2434) +++ util/flashrom/sst49lf040.c (working copy) @@ -59,13 +59,11 @@ erase_sector_jedec(bios, i * page_size); /* write to the sector */ - if((i&0xfff)==0xfff) - printf("%04d at address: 0x%08x ", i, i * page_size); + printf("%04d at address: 0x%08x ", i, i * page_size); write_sector_jedec(bios, buf + i * page_size, bios + i * page_size, page_size); - if((i&0xfff)==0xfff) - printf("\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b"); + printf("\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b"); fflush(stdout); } printf("\n");

4 8

[LinuxBIOS] r2449 - trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom
by svn＠openbios.org 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

Author: stepan Date: 2006-10-07 02:23:51 +0200 (Sat, 07 Oct 2006) New Revision: 2449 Modified: trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash_rom.c Log: Tiny patch to show the size of the detected flash part from Uwe Hermann <uwe(a)hermann-uwe.de> X-Signed-Off-By: Stefan Reinauer <stepan(a)coresystems.de> Modified: trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash_rom.c =================================================================== --- trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash_rom.c 2006-10-07 00:21:13 UTC (rev 2448) +++ trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/util/flashrom/flash_rom.c 2006-10-07 00:23:51 UTC (rev 2449) @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ exit(1); } - printf("Flash part is %s\n", flash->name); + printf("Flash part is %s (%d KB)\n", flash->name, flash->total_size); if (!filename && !erase_it) { // FIXME: Do we really want this feature implicitly?

1 0

← Newer
1
...
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot October 2006