Re: [LinuxBIOS] Flashrom problem & IRQ questions

[Stefan Reinauer]

* Jonathan Sturges  [070302 01:04]:
> apparently doing nothing but not returning failure.  The burn option 
> also returns immediately, and indicates failure either because the chip 
> isn't blank, or (I suspect) it's not actually able to write to it:

-v only does verify. you have to use -w for writing.
> [root@fc5-test ~]# ./flashrom -E
> Calibrating delay loop... ok
> Found LinuxBIOS table at: 00000530
> vendor id: eaglelion part id: 5bcm
> Enabling flash write on CS5530...OK
> SST29EE020A found at physical address: 0xfffc0000
> Flash part is SST29EE020A (256 KB)
> Erasing flash chip
> [root@fc5-test ~]# ./flashrom -v linuxbios-irq-test2-20070301.rom
> Calibrating delay loop... ok
> Found LinuxBIOS table at: 00000530
> vendor id: eaglelion part id: 5bcm
> Enabling flash write on CS5530...OK
> SST29EE020A found at physical address: 0xfffc0000
> Flash part is SST29EE020A (256 KB)
> Verifying flash - FAILED
> [root@fc5-test ~]#
>
> Any clues to flashrom's behavior appreciated.
>
> I'm also trying to map out the IRQ routing for the onboard NIC and USB 
> OHCI adapters, and I have a few questions:
> Does the order the devices appear in LB's irq_tables.c matter?
> Linux always finds the LB IRQ table, but doesn't seem able to map
>
> IRQs to my devices.  Aren't the PCI IRQ lines mappable to pretty much 
> any available ISA IRQ line, or are these hardwired?  Here's an example 
> of what I mean, from one of my tests (kernel 2.6.20.1, with PCI 
> debugging enabled):
> natsemi dp8381x driver, version 2.1, Sept 11, 2006
>   originally by Donald Becker 
>   http://www.scyld.com/network/natsemi.html
>   2.4.x kernel port by Jeff Garzik, Tjeerd Mulder
> IRQ for 0000:00:15.0[A] -> PIRQ 02, mask 0400, excl 0800 -> newirq=10 
> ... failed
> PCI: Guessed IRQ 10 for device 0000:00:15.0
> natsemi eth0: NatSemi DP8381[56] at 0xfebf2000 (0000:00:15.0), 
> 00:50:f6:22:66:ba
> , IRQ 10, port TP.
>
> Even though it "guesses" IRQ 10, which is what I set in the table, it 
> doesn't work.  Is that because I've got the NIC's INTA pointed at the 
> wrong PCI IRQ in my irq_tables.c, or because of something else?
>
> Oh and before I forget, this is harder than a normal PC, due to the fact 
> that the original BIOS in this winterm was for WinCE only.
> Thanks for any help with the IRQ mapping, I've not done this before and 
> I'm not having an easy time with it.
>
> -Jonathan