Alan Green has uploaded this change for review. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position
Put entry for Unknown SFDP-capable chip back into place at end of file.
SHA 1f9cc7d89992114c70f7a0545ad9f98701bebe56 reordered many entries in flashchips.c, including this one. However, the entry for Unknown, SFDP-capable chip should not have been moved before any specific chip entries.
As reported by Angel Pons th3fanbus@gmail.com at https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/33931:
""" Oops, this introduced a bug: the SFDP entry is no longer at the end of flashchips.c, so probing on a SFDP-capable Winbond chip results in added noise (flashrom says things about an unknown chip, and then has two definitions for the same chip). """
Signed-off-by: Alan Green avg@google.com Change-Id: I5955020456dbcd5e7db280a459b668a743e464dc --- M flashchips.c 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/flashrom refs/changes/37/35037/1
diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c index c6f9517..9b686c1 100644 --- a/flashchips.c +++ b/flashchips.c @@ -15612,28 +15612,6 @@ },
{ - .vendor = "Unknown", - .name = "SFDP-capable chip", - .bustype = BUS_SPI, - .manufacture_id = GENERIC_MANUF_ID, - .model_id = SFDP_DEVICE_ID, - .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}, - }, - - { .vendor = "Winbond", .name = "W25P16", .bustype = BUS_SPI, @@ -17576,6 +17554,28 @@ },
{ + .vendor = "Unknown", + .name = "SFDP-capable chip", + .bustype = BUS_SPI, + .manufacture_id = GENERIC_MANUF_ID, + .model_id = SFDP_DEVICE_ID, + .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}, + }, + + { .vendor = "Programmer", .name = "Opaque flash chip", .bustype = BUS_PROG,
Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+2
(1 comment)
Thanks!
https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037/1//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037/1//COMMIT_MSG@11 PS1, Line 11: SHA s/SHA/Commit
Maybe add the commit summary as well
Hello Edward O'Callaghan, Angel Pons, build bot (Jenkins),
I'd like you to reexamine a change. Please visit
https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037
to look at the new patch set (#2).
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position
Put entry for Unknown SFDP-capable chip back into place at end of file.
Change 1f9cc7d89992114c70f7a0545ad9f98701bebe56 "flashchips.c: Sort file by vendor and model" reordered many entries in flashchips.c, including this one. However, the entry for Unknown, SFDP-capable chip should not have been moved before any specific chip entries.
As reported by Angel Pons th3fanbus@gmail.com at https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/33931:
""" Oops, this introduced a bug: the SFDP entry is no longer at the end of flashchips.c, so probing on a SFDP-capable Winbond chip results in added noise (flashrom says things about an unknown chip, and then has two definitions for the same chip). """
Signed-off-by: Alan Green avg@google.com Change-Id: I5955020456dbcd5e7db280a459b668a743e464dc --- M flashchips.c 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/flashrom refs/changes/37/35037/2
Alan Green has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+2
(1 comment)
Thanks!
Done.
Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
Welp, looks like jenkins just forgot about this... Mind triggering a rebase, or mind if I do?
Alan Green has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
Patch Set 2:
Welp, looks like jenkins just forgot about this... Mind triggering a rebase, or mind if I do?
Git tells me it is already up to date!
Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 4: Code-Review+1
Patch Set 2:
Patch Set 2:
Welp, looks like jenkins just forgot about this... Mind triggering a rebase, or mind if I do?
Git tells me it is already up to date!
Tried rebasing so that Jenkins rebuilds this, hope it works.
Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 4: Code-Review+2
Not sure if a 3rd person would need to +2 this because of the reupload I did.
Edward O'Callaghan has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
Patch Set 4: Code-Review+2
Edward O'Callaghan has submitted this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 )
Change subject: flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position ......................................................................
flashchips.c: Put SFDP-capable chip back into position
Put entry for Unknown SFDP-capable chip back into place at end of file.
Change 1f9cc7d89992114c70f7a0545ad9f98701bebe56 "flashchips.c: Sort file by vendor and model" reordered many entries in flashchips.c, including this one. However, the entry for Unknown, SFDP-capable chip should not have been moved before any specific chip entries.
As reported by Angel Pons th3fanbus@gmail.com at https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/33931:
""" Oops, this introduced a bug: the SFDP entry is no longer at the end of flashchips.c, so probing on a SFDP-capable Winbond chip results in added noise (flashrom says things about an unknown chip, and then has two definitions for the same chip). """
Signed-off-by: Alan Green avg@google.com Change-Id: I5955020456dbcd5e7db280a459b668a743e464dc Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/35037 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, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Approvals: build bot (Jenkins): Verified Angel Pons: Looks good to me, approved Edward O'Callaghan: Looks good to me, approved
diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c index c6f9517..9b686c1 100644 --- a/flashchips.c +++ b/flashchips.c @@ -15612,28 +15612,6 @@ },
{ - .vendor = "Unknown", - .name = "SFDP-capable chip", - .bustype = BUS_SPI, - .manufacture_id = GENERIC_MANUF_ID, - .model_id = SFDP_DEVICE_ID, - .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}, - }, - - { .vendor = "Winbond", .name = "W25P16", .bustype = BUS_SPI, @@ -17576,6 +17554,28 @@ },
{ + .vendor = "Unknown", + .name = "SFDP-capable chip", + .bustype = BUS_SPI, + .manufacture_id = GENERIC_MANUF_ID, + .model_id = SFDP_DEVICE_ID, + .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}, + }, + + { .vendor = "Programmer", .name = "Opaque flash chip", .bustype = BUS_PROG,
-
Alan Green (Code Review) -
Angel Pons (Code Review)
-
Edward O'Callaghan (Code Review)