(3 comments)
>> Code looks good, how well was the rebase tested?
>
> After I've tested the code and submitted these ported patches,
the
> only rebase was because of a small typo fix at one of the commit
> messages, so the results are still positive - fully tested on the
> real hardwareI meant the original rebase of Paul's work. What is "the real hard-
ware"? It should be primarily tested on previously supported pro-
grammers and flash chips to make sure nothing regresses.
(3 comments)
>> Code looks good, how well was the rebase tested?
>
> After I've tested the code and submitted these ported patches,
the
> only rebase was because of a small typo fix at one of the commit
> messages, so the results are still positive - fully tested on the
> real hardwareI meant the original rebase of Paul's work. What is "the real hard-
ware"? It should be primarily tested on previously supported pro-
grammers and flash chips to make sure nothing regresses.
Since the original submission of KB9012 patches by Paul , flashrom source code has been significantly changed (most importantly "Kill doit()") - thats why the additional modifications (included to the commits above) were required to make them work, can't be tested without modifications. "Real hardware" is G505S laptop with KB9012 chip installed onboard, my flashing setup is fully described at this manual - http://dangerousprototypes.com/docs/Flashing_KB9012_with_Bus_Pirate After the changes, what I've tried:
*) using CH341A SPI USB programmer - 1) Probed/read/erased/flashed/verified KB9012 a few times, looks like its working perfectly :) 2) Tried all these operations with a few chips from SPI 25 series - EN25QH16, EN25QH32, and S25FL032A/P to make sure that nothing broke down for them after KB9012 patches
*) using Bus Pirate v4 programmer - did only "2)" (didn't retest KB9012 because the Bus Pirate is much slower with KB9012 than other programmers)
To view, visit change 23258. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.