Attention is currently required from: Felix Singer, Nico Huber, Michał Żygowski, Michael Niewöhner.

View Change

1 comment:

• Patchset:

  • Patch Set #4:

    I think it's awesome that the DMI checks were there from the beginning. This
    is the way to go. Great work!

    retrieve the chip ID at indices 0x20/0x21 and find a match in a table of supported ECs. This could also be used to handle the ITE IT5570E differences.

    There is no standard for these registers, any chip could return the same
    as an ITE one. There is not even a guarantee that the 0x2e/0x2ef ports are
    used as a register/data pair. Probing such things is ok for a development
    tool like `inteltool`, who cares if the developer's machine resets/bricks?
    But flashrom is not a hacking tool, it's users are humble. There will be
    people who'll simply try the programmer.

    Good point. I forget about flashrom not being a hacking tool.

    or better the firmware id (e.g. the "ITE string" or sth else) because support for this firmware-based programming mechanism is implemented in EC fw

    That's right, we would not only have to detect the chip without probing
    any non-standard ports, we'd also have to figure out what firmware it
    runs. How would one get this string without making assumptions that can
    be broken (e.g. by not using ITEs firmware framework)?

    Maintaining a table of compatible boards is much likely the least work.
    Having said that, it might not be a bad idea to add additional checks
    after the board detection, i.e. when we know the board, we know that
    there is an ITE chips, can find the PMC pair, try to check for a com-
    patible firmware (currently the code starts with writes without
    knowing if the firmware is compatible; e.g. did somebody replace it
    with the System76 one?).

    I agree. If a board isn't in the compatibility list, it can be added once it's known to work.

    So basically we can rename the programmer to something like ite_ec. Any other suggestions?

    I'd say `ite_ecfw.c`. After all it's not a driver for their chips but
    for their firmware framework?.

    +1

To view, visit change 55715. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.