Change in flashrom[master]: ite_ec: Implement support for flashing ITE ECs found on TUXEDO laptops
Attention is currently required from: Felix Singer, Nico Huber, Michał Żygowski, Paul Menzel, Michael Niewöhner. Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/55715 )
Change subject: ite_ec: Implement support for flashing ITE ECs found on TUXEDO laptops ......................................................................
Patch Set 8:
(1 comment)
Patchset:
PS4:
Maybe they are unique. However I have this feeling that DMI checks are more reliable. […]
We could use both DMI and SVID/SDID checks:
- DMI good, SVID/SDID good ---> [1] - DMI good, SVID/SDID bad ---> [2] - DMI bad, SVID/SDID good ---> [3] - DMI bad, SVID/SDID bad ---> [4]
[1]: full match, proceed as usual. [2]: unexpected (DMI is more specific than SVID/SDID), abort unless forced [3]: mention that things could work, but abort unless forced [4]: unknown machine, abort unless forced
Running into [2] would be very unusual. I'd explain the situation (DMI strings match, but SVID/SDID do not; could be a boot firmware bug or an unsupported system) and warn against continuing unless one is certain that the mismatched SVID/SDID is spurious (not something the mailing list would know).
For [3], I'd make flashrom say:
- What happened: SVID/SDID match, but DMI strings do not - What the above implies: the machine might just be a rebranded system - What to do: if one can risk a brick, try forcing and see what happens. if it works, then add the DMI strings to flashrom and submit a patch
In both cases, log the known DMI strings and SVID/SDID values (print both expected and actual SVID/SDID in [2]).
Thoughts?
-
Angel Pons (Code Review)