December 2021 - flashrom-gerrit

Change in flashrom[master]: flashrom.c: Make {read,write}_buf_from_include_args() public
by Edward O'Callaghan (Code Review) 12 Dec '21

12 Dec '21

Edward O'Callaghan has uploaded this change for review. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60069 ) Change subject: flashrom.c: Make {read,write}_buf_from_include_args() public ...................................................................... flashrom.c: Make {read,write}_buf_from_include_args() public This allows for moving all the do_*() helper functions use for the cli from flashrom.c within static local functions in cli_classic.c BUG=b:208132085 TEST=`make` Change-Id: Ia0abec655a682ca449d0e8ba620886a2d616b86d Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec(a)google.com> --- M flash.h M flashrom.c 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/flashrom refs/changes/69/60069/1 diff --git a/flash.h b/flash.h index 134d7d3..ab58478 100644 --- a/flash.h +++ b/flash.h @@ -349,7 +349,9 @@ void list_programmers_linebreak(int startcol, int cols, int paren); int selfcheck(void); int read_buf_from_file(unsigned char *buf, unsigned long size, const char *filename); +int read_buf_from_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, unsigned char *buf); int write_buf_to_file(const unsigned char *buf, unsigned long size, const char *filename); +int write_buf_to_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, unsigned char *buf); int prepare_flash_access(struct flashctx *, bool read_it, bool write_it, bool erase_it, bool verify_it); void finalize_flash_access(struct flashctx *); int do_read(struct flashctx *, const char *filename); diff --git a/flashrom.c b/flashrom.c index c2bf9d8..a8f1b81 100644 --- a/flashrom.c +++ b/flashrom.c @@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ * @param buf Chip-sized buffer to write data to * @return 0 on success */ -static int read_buf_from_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, +int read_buf_from_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, unsigned char *buf) { const struct flashrom_layout *const layout = get_layout(flash); @@ -1030,7 +1030,7 @@ * @param buf Chip-sized buffer to read data from * @return 0 on success */ -static int write_buf_to_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, +int write_buf_to_include_args(const struct flashctx *const flash, unsigned char *buf) { const struct flashrom_layout *const layout = get_layout(flash); -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60069 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Ia0abec655a682ca449d0e8ba620886a2d616b86d Gerrit-Change-Number: 60069 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Owner: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-MessageType: newchange

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: cli_classic.c: Convert do_erase() to libflashrom call
by Edward O'Callaghan (Code Review) 12 Dec '21

12 Dec '21

Edward O'Callaghan has uploaded this change for review. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60068 ) Change subject: cli_classic.c: Convert do_erase() to libflashrom call ...................................................................... cli_classic.c: Convert do_erase() to libflashrom call Inline emergency_help_message() to flashrom_flash_erase() to be consistent with the other libflashrom API's. This leaves do_erase() a redudant wrapper and moves us a step closer to cli_classic as a pure libflashrom user. BUG=b:208132085 TEST=`make` Change-Id: I8566164e7dbad69cf478b24208014f10fb99e4d0 Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec(a)google.com> --- M cli_classic.c M flash.h M flashrom.c M tests/chip.c 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/flashrom refs/changes/68/60068/1 diff --git a/cli_classic.c b/cli_classic.c index 101d272..4d702cc 100644 --- a/cli_classic.c +++ b/cli_classic.c @@ -841,7 +841,7 @@ else if (extract_it) ret = do_extract(fill_flash); else if (erase_it) - ret = do_erase(fill_flash); + ret = flashrom_flash_erase(fill_flash); else if (write_it) ret = do_write(fill_flash, filename, referencefile); else if (verify_it) diff --git a/flash.h b/flash.h index 8c24c0c..134d7d3 100644 --- a/flash.h +++ b/flash.h @@ -354,7 +354,6 @@ void finalize_flash_access(struct flashctx *); int do_read(struct flashctx *, const char *filename); int do_extract(struct flashctx *); -int do_erase(struct flashctx *); int do_write(struct flashctx *, const char *const filename, const char *const referencefile); int do_verify(struct flashctx *, const char *const filename); int register_chip_restore(chip_restore_fn_cb_t func, struct flashctx *flash, uint8_t status); diff --git a/flashrom.c b/flashrom.c index dc09b89..c2bf9d8 100644 --- a/flashrom.c +++ b/flashrom.c @@ -1899,6 +1899,16 @@ finalize_flash_access(flashctx); + /* + * FIXME: Do we really want the scary warning if erase failed? + * After all, after erase the chip is either blank or partially + * blank or it has the old contents. A blank chip won't boot, + * so if the user wanted erase and reboots afterwards, the user + * knows very well that booting won't work. + */ + if (ret) + emergency_help_message(); + return ret; } @@ -2196,23 +2206,6 @@ return do_read(flash, NULL); } -int do_erase(struct flashctx *const flash) -{ - const int ret = flashrom_flash_erase(flash); - - /* - * FIXME: Do we really want the scary warning if erase failed? - * After all, after erase the chip is either blank or partially - * blank or it has the old contents. A blank chip won't boot, - * so if the user wanted erase and reboots afterwards, the user - * knows very well that booting won't work. - */ - if (ret) - emergency_help_message(); - - return ret; -} - int do_write(struct flashctx *const flash, const char *const filename, const char *const referencefile) { const size_t flash_size = flash->chip->total_size * 1024; diff --git a/tests/chip.c b/tests/chip.c index 9c06fe7..e07c900 100644 --- a/tests/chip.c +++ b/tests/chip.c @@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ setup_chip(&flashctx, &layout, &mock_chip, param); printf("Erase chip operation started.\n"); - assert_int_equal(0, do_erase(&flashctx)); + assert_int_equal(0, flashrom_flash_erase(&flashctx)); printf("Erase chip operation done.\n"); teardown(&layout); @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ setup_chip(&flashctx, &layout, &mock_chip, param_dup); printf("Erase chip operation started.\n"); - assert_int_equal(0, do_erase(&flashctx)); + assert_int_equal(0, flashrom_flash_erase(&flashctx)); printf("Erase chip operation done.\n"); teardown(&layout); -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60068 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: I8566164e7dbad69cf478b24208014f10fb99e4d0 Gerrit-Change-Number: 60068 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Owner: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-MessageType: newchange

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: flashrom.c: extract operation only uses layout files
by Edward O'Callaghan (Code Review) 12 Dec '21

12 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Daniel Campello, Angel Pons, Anastasia Klimchuk. Edward O'Callaghan has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/59921 ) Change subject: flashrom.c: extract operation only uses layout files ...................................................................... Patch Set 4: Code-Review+2 (1 comment) Patchset: PS4: > > I don't understand the concern that goes away when "filename check would move from read_flash_to_f […] I tend to agree with Daniel here. I am not sure what the concern is since read_flash_to_file() has a singular call site and CB:59291 is simply a matter of inlining read_flash_to_file() to the call site. To Daniel's point, it isn't about what the code could be doing but rather what it is actually doing. In relation to the question of if do_read() *should* or *could* take 'filename' as type optional, well the user is write_buf_to_file() which returns 1 upon nullarity which is the bug that this patch fixes and that all other use cases of do_read() within cli_classic have 'filename' validated with, `if ((read_it | write_it | verify_it) && check_filename(filename, "image"))`. Therefore the *should* is redundant and arguably more error prone as it caused the bug in the first place since validation is happening at multiple layers in a inconsistent manner. I however see your logic however a deeper inspection reveals that we should make the top of the call stack responsible for the semantics of whether 'filename' is optional or not and not at a 'low level'. This results in consistent expectations of the caller of who is responsible. Shame C doesn't have types for this to put into the function signatures. I would be far more in favor of a bug fix being merged as a priority over a refactor patch that simply inlines a function which is an orthogonal problem. -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/59921 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Ibc9a4e2966385863345f06662521d6d0e4685121 Gerrit-Change-Number: 59921 Gerrit-PatchSet: 4 Gerrit-Owner: Daniel Campello <campello(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-CC: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Attention: Daniel Campello <campello(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-Attention: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Attention: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 01:18:24 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: Yes Comment-In-Reply-To: Daniel Campello <campello(a)chromium.org> Comment-In-Reply-To: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm(a)chromium.org> Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: SFDP: drop static table length check to make newer SFDP revisions work
by Michael Niewöhner (Code Review) 11 Dec '21

11 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Felix Singer, Nico Huber. 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 1: (1 comment) Commit Message: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055/comment/7c9f51d4_2791be7c PS1, Line 28: ***RFC*** We could maintain a list of revisions/lengths but is it really : worth it? : RFC -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Id84cde4ebc805d68e2984e8041fbc48d7ceebe34 Gerrit-Change-Number: 60055 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Owner: Michael Niewöhner <foss(a)mniewoehner.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Felix Singer <felixsinger(a)posteo.net> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-Attention: Felix Singer <felixsinger(a)posteo.net> Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 22:05:50 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: SFDP: drop static table length check to make newer SFDP revisions work
by Michael Niewöhner (Code Review) 11 Dec '21

11 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Felix Singer, Nico Huber. 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 1: This change is ready for review. -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60055 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Id84cde4ebc805d68e2984e8041fbc48d7ceebe34 Gerrit-Change-Number: 60055 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Owner: Michael Niewöhner <foss(a)mniewoehner.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Felix Singer <felixsinger(a)posteo.net> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-Attention: Felix Singer <felixsinger(a)posteo.net> Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 21:33:09 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: No Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1
by Thomas Heijligen (Code Review) 09 Dec '21

09 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Nico Huber. Thomas Heijligen has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 ) Change subject: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1 ...................................................................... Patch Set 8: (1 comment) File Makefile.include: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623/comment/8f0c8372_115f3c2f PS5, Line 40: 2>/dev/null > How? I mean it's about unexpected errors, not expected ones. So I don't […] she $(debug_shell will work until we move all this in a target. Then we have to do the logging again. -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: I41f5186d9f3e063c12c8c6eea888d0b0bf534259 Gerrit-Change-Number: 58623 Gerrit-PatchSet: 8 Gerrit-Owner: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org> Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 21:12:11 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Comment-In-Reply-To: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: flashchips: Add W25Q64JV
by Nico Huber (Code Review) 09 Dec '21

09 Dec '21

Nico Huber has submitted this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58971 ) Change subject: flashchips: Add W25Q64JV ...................................................................... flashchips: Add W25Q64JV I have successfully tested it with FT2232H-programmer. Change-Id: Ia9a32146b225eca66e9a6bfef45be5f2b24aef46 Signed-off-by: Simon Buhrow <simon.buhrow(a)posteo.de> Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58971 Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> --- M flashchips.c M flashchips.h 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Approvals: build bot (Jenkins): Verified Angel Pons: Looks good to me, approved diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c index 434c46d..21eeb39 100644 --- a/flashchips.c +++ b/flashchips.c @@ -17869,6 +17869,46 @@ { .vendor = "Winbond", + .name = "W25Q64JV", + .bustype = BUS_SPI, + .manufacture_id = WINBOND_NEX_ID, + .model_id = WINBOND_NEX_W25Q64JV, + .total_size = 8192, + .page_size = 256, + /* supports SFDP */ + /* QPI enable 0x38 */ + .feature_bits = FEATURE_WRSR_WREN | FEATURE_OTP | FEATURE_QPI, + .tested = TEST_OK_PREW, + .probe = probe_spi_rdid, + .probe_timing = TIMING_ZERO, + .block_erasers = + { + { + .eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 2048} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_20, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {32 * 1024, 256} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_52, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 128} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {8 * 1024 * 1024, 1} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_60, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {8 * 1024 * 1024, 1} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7, + } + }, + .printlock = spi_prettyprint_status_register_bp2_tb_bpl, + .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect_bp2_srwd, + .write = spi_chip_write_256, + .read = spi_chip_read, + .voltage = {2700, 3600}, + }, + + { + .vendor = "Winbond", .name = "W25Q64.W", .bustype = BUS_SPI, .manufacture_id = WINBOND_NEX_ID, diff --git a/flashchips.h b/flashchips.h index e190dca..ba97719 100644 --- a/flashchips.h +++ b/flashchips.h @@ -976,6 +976,7 @@ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q64_W 0x6017 /* W25Q64DW; W25Q64FV in QPI mode */ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q128_W 0x6018 /* W25Q128FW; W25Q128FV in QPI mode */ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q256_W 0x6019 /* W25Q256JW */ +#define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q64JV 0x7017 /* W25Q64JV */ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q128_V_M 0x7018 /* W25Q128JVSM */ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q256JV_M 0x7019 /* W25Q256JV_M (QE=0) */ #define WINBOND_NEX_W25Q32JW_M 0x8016 /* W25Q32JW...M */ -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58971 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Ia9a32146b225eca66e9a6bfef45be5f2b24aef46 Gerrit-Change-Number: 58971 Gerrit-PatchSet: 3 Gerrit-Owner: Simon Buhrow Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-MessageType: merged

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1
by Nico Huber (Code Review) 09 Dec '21

09 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Thomas Heijligen. Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 ) Change subject: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1 ...................................................................... Patch Set 8: (1 comment) File Makefile.include: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623/comment/2182cb58_8d80a970 PS5, Line 40: 2>/dev/null > I think the terminal output of the Makefile should be enough in the end. How? I mean it's about unexpected errors, not expected ones. So I don't think we'd want to clutter the Makefile just to provide accurate messages. For instance, if anything goes wrong in `find_dependency` but lets make continue, we'd simply print that the dependency wasn't found. Ok, that's true, but doesn't tell us why it wasn't found. It could still be there. We'd at least have to also check if `pkg-config` is there, and if `pkg-config` can run (e.g. doesn't have trouble with shared libraries; I get that a lot on ArchLinux when installing something new without updating the whole system). Then, if pkg-config knows any error condi- tions, we'd have to relay that too? OTOH, it's not very hard to keep the current behavior, e.g. just call `debug_shell` instead of `shell`? -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: I41f5186d9f3e063c12c8c6eea888d0b0bf534259 Gerrit-Change-Number: 58623 Gerrit-PatchSet: 8 Gerrit-Owner: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org> Gerrit-Attention: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 18:38:49 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Comment-In-Reply-To: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: pci.h: move include into own wrapper
by Thomas Heijligen (Code Review) 08 Dec '21

08 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Nico Huber, Angel Pons. Thomas Heijligen has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58883 ) Change subject: pci.h: move include into own wrapper ...................................................................... Patch Set 3: (1 comment) File hwaccess.h: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58883/comment/abff5a46_66fc362d PS1, Line 36: #define pci_mmio_writeb mmio_le_writeb : #define pci_mmio_writew mmio_le_writew : #define pci_mmio_writel mmio_le_writel : #define pci_mmio_readb mmio_le_readb : #define pci_mmio_readw mmio_le_readw : #define pci_mmio_readl mmio_le_readl > cf. 1d3a2fef […] Ok, I'll keep the pci_*** names for now. -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58883 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Ibf00356f0ef5cc92e0ec99f8fe5cdda56f47b166 Gerrit-Change-Number: 58883 Gerrit-PatchSet: 3 Gerrit-Owner: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Attention: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 18:31:32 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Comment-In-Reply-To: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

Change in flashrom[master]: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1
by Thomas Heijligen (Code Review) 08 Dec '21

08 Dec '21

Attention is currently required from: Nico Huber. Thomas Heijligen has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 ) Change subject: Makefile: Make pkg-config mandatory to find libftdi1 ...................................................................... Patch Set 8: (1 comment) File Makefile.include: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623/comment/348499bd_b79ecfd3 PS5, Line 40: 2>/dev/null > Looking at CB:59230 made me realize that we don't output into […] I think the terminal output of the Makefile should be enough in the end. -- To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58623 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings Gerrit-Project: flashrom Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: I41f5186d9f3e063c12c8c6eea888d0b0bf534259 Gerrit-Change-Number: 58623 Gerrit-PatchSet: 8 Gerrit-Owner: Thomas Heijligen <src(a)posteo.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org> Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org> Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:21:02 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> Gerrit-MessageType: comment

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

flashrom-gerrit December 2021