[M] Change in flashrom[master]: writeprotect.c: differentiate lack of WP from lack of implementation

[Nico Huber (Code Review)]

Attention is currently required from: Nikolai Artemiev, Sergii Dmytruk.

Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/68221 )

Change subject: writeprotect.c: differentiate lack of WP from lack of implementation
......................................................................

Patch Set 5:

(1 comment)

Commit Message:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/68221/comment/a9ea3546_618521d2 
PS4, Line 10: preventing confusion
> I guess it depends on the meaning of `NT`. I took it as "unknown" which can also include `NA`. […]

Wrt. if this prevents confusion, I don't think it matters how we define `NT`.
What causes or prevents confusion is what we print, i.e. "WP operations are
not implemented for this chip" vs. "this chip doesn't support WP". I'm not
sure if that is enough.

We would still print the former in the NT case, right? Which is the most
common and most confusing state, IMHO. And if we'd change the text, how
could we distinguish "unknown" from "known WP support but not implemented"?

I'm not against this change, just not sure if it changes something (wrt. usability).