Change in flashrom[master]: [v4, 1/6] Add support for selecting the erased bit value with a flag

[Mike Banon (Code Review)]

Mike Banon has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/23258 )

Change subject: [v4,1/6] Add support for selecting the erased bit value with a flag
......................................................................

Patch Set 2:

(5 comments)
> (5 comments)
>
> Code looks good, how well was the rebase tested?
> (5 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 hardware

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1//COMMIT_MSG
Commit Message:

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1//COMMIT_MSG@2
PS1, Line 2: Author:     Mike Banon
> As a courtesy, you should reset the author to Paul, or use […]

All my commit messages which contain Paul's code - are giving the credit to Paul by including the note "Original patch has been created by Paul Kocialkowski" with a link to it. I'm not the author of the original patches, but while porting these patches I've modified them to make them compatible with the latest flashrom. And still haven't received any comment from Paul - it would be wrong to put his signature when we still do not even know his opinion about these changed patches. Also, these modified patches could contain mistakes (although I tried not to make any) - in which case it is me the committer who will have to be blamed

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1//COMMIT_MSG@7
PS1, Line 7: [v4,1/6]
> Please remove this tag.

After these tags are removed, would it still be convenient to merge these patches in the correct order? (1/6->2/6->3/6->4/6->5/6->6/6) I'm just trying to follow Paul's scheme from patchwork, it seemed to me as a right approach

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1//COMMIT_MSG@17
PS1, Line 17: Signed-off-by: Mike Banon
> Please also keep original Signed-off-by lines.

These patches have been modified to make them compatible with the latest flashrom, not taken as-is. Not sure if the original signed-off-by still applies, because - since I've modified these patches - I should take the full responsibility for their quality

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1/flashrom.c
File flashrom.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1/flashrom.c@762
PS1, Line 762: static int need_erase_gran_bytes(const uint8_t *have, const uint8_t *want, unsigned int len,
> line is too long (112 chars limit)

fixed at new edit

https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/23258/1/flashrom.c@792
PS1, Line 792:  */
> line is too long

fixed at new edit