Edward O'Callaghan merged this change.
flashchips.c: Format SFDP-capable chip entry
To allow automated tools to manipulate flashchips.c, make the definition
of SFDP-capable chip more consistent with other definitions. This
involves
- reordering fields to match both other entries and the definition of
struct flashchip.
- reformatting comments to make them consistent with other entries.
Signed-off-by: Alan Green <avg@google.com>
Change-Id: I8708a11993822085b3e8d8c80532dfb935d39876
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/33834
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
---
M flashchips.c
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
index 246f139..0906b1f 100644
--- a/flashchips.c
+++ b/flashchips.c
@@ -17458,21 +17458,20 @@
.bustype = BUS_SPI,
.manufacture_id = GENERIC_MANUF_ID,
.model_id = SFDP_DEVICE_ID,
- /* We present our own "report this" text hence we do not
- * want the default "This flash part has status UNTESTED..."
- * text to be printed. */
+ .total_size = 0, /* set by probing function */
+ .page_size = 0, /* set by probing function */
+ .feature_bits = 0, /* set by probing function */
+ /* We present our own "report this" text hence we do not */
+ /* want the default "This flash part has status UNTESTED..." */
+ /* text to be printed. */
.tested = TEST_OK_PREW,
.probe = probe_spi_sfdp,
+ .block_erasers = {}, /* set by probing function */
.unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect, /* is this safe? */
+ .write = NULL, /* set by probing function */
.read = spi_chip_read,
/* FIXME: some vendor extensions define this */
.voltage = {0},
- /* Everything below will be set by the probing function. */
- .write = NULL,
- .total_size = 0,
- .page_size = 0,
- .feature_bits = 0,
- .block_erasers = {},
},
{
To view, visit change 33834. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.