flashrom March 2010

flashrom@flashrom.org

49 participants
211 discussions

[PATCH] Fix handling of empty dmidecode output
by Michael Karcher 24 Mar '10

24 Mar '10

Signed-off-by: Michael Karcher <flashrom(a)mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de> --- dmi.c | 13 ++++++++----- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/dmi.c b/dmi.c index 716a7c6..d9f307f 100644 --- a/dmi.c +++ b/dmi.c @@ -56,11 +56,14 @@ static char *get_dmi_string(const char *string_name) printf_debug("DMI pipe open error\n"); return NULL; } - if (!fgets(answerbuf, DMI_MAX_ANSWER_LEN, dmidecode_pipe) && - ferror(dmidecode_pipe)) { - printf_debug("DMI pipe read error\n"); - pclose(dmidecode_pipe); - return NULL; + if (!fgets(answerbuf, DMI_MAX_ANSWER_LEN, dmidecode_pipe)) { + if(ferror(dmidecode_pipe)) { + printf_debug("DMI pipe read error\n"); + pclose(dmidecode_pipe); + return NULL; + } else { + answerbuf[0] = 0; /* Hit EOF */ + } } /* Toss all output above DMI_MAX_ANSWER_LEN away to prevent deadlock on pclose. */ -- 1.7.0

1 0

No DMI for ST M50FW080
by Joseph Smith 24 Mar '10

24 Mar '10

see attached log. -- Thanks, Joseph Smith Set-Top-Linux www.settoplinux.org

1 0

[PATCH] clean up sst49lfxxxc.c
by Sean Nelson 23 Mar '10

23 Mar '10

Sst49lfxxxc chips are functionally the same as 82802ab chips. Sst49lfxxxc software status register is functionally the same as the 82802ab status register, "Block Protect Status"(49lfxxxc) can be treated the same as "Device Protect Status"(82802ab). Erase_block_49lfxxxc is the same command sequence as erase_block_82802ab. Add unlock_49lfxxxc to chips definitions. Write_sector_49lfxxxc is the same as write_page_82802ab. Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson <audiohacked(a)gmail.com>

2 2

[commit] r972 - trunk
by repository service 23 Mar '10

23 Mar '10

Author: snelson Date: Tue Mar 23 18:10:28 2010 New Revision: 972 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/972 Log: Sst49lfxxxc chips are functionally the same as 82802ab chips. Sst49lfxxxc software status register is functionally the same as the 82802ab status register, "Block Protect Status"(49lfxxxc) can be treated the same as "Device Protect Status"(82802ab). Erase_block_49lfxxxc is the same command sequence as erase_block_82802ab. Add unlock_49lfxxxc to chips definitions. Write_sector_49lfxxxc is the same as write_page_82802ab. Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson <audiohacked(a)gmail.com> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Modified: trunk/chipdrivers.h trunk/flashchips.c trunk/sst49lfxxxc.c Modified: trunk/chipdrivers.h ============================================================================== --- trunk/chipdrivers.h Tue Mar 23 00:47:38 2010 (r971) +++ trunk/chipdrivers.h Tue Mar 23 18:10:28 2010 (r972) @@ -100,11 +100,7 @@ int write_28sf040(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf); /* sst49lfxxxc.c */ -int probe_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash); -int erase_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash); int erase_sector_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int address, unsigned int sector_size); -int erase_block_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int address, unsigned int sector_size); -int erase_chip_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int addr, unsigned int blocksize); int write_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf); int unlock_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash); Modified: trunk/flashchips.c ============================================================================== --- trunk/flashchips.c Tue Mar 23 00:47:38 2010 (r971) +++ trunk/flashchips.c Tue Mar 23 18:10:28 2010 (r972) @@ -4190,9 +4190,10 @@ {8 * 1024, 2}, {16 * 1024, 1}, }, - .block_erase = erase_block_49lfxxxc, + .block_erase = erase_block_82802ab, } }, + .unlock = unlock_49lfxxxc, .write = write_49lfxxxc, .read = read_memmapped, }, @@ -4252,9 +4253,10 @@ {8 * 1024, 2}, {16 * 1024, 1}, }, - .block_erase = erase_block_49lfxxxc, + .block_erase = erase_block_82802ab, } }, + .unlock = unlock_49lfxxxc, .write = write_49lfxxxc, .read = read_memmapped, }, @@ -4283,9 +4285,10 @@ {8 * 1024, 2}, {16 * 1024, 1}, }, - .block_erase = erase_block_49lfxxxc, + .block_erase = erase_block_82802ab, } }, + .unlock = unlock_49lfxxxc, .write = write_49lfxxxc, .read = read_memmapped, }, @@ -4459,7 +4462,7 @@ {8 * 1024, 2}, {16 * 1024, 1}, }, - .block_erase = erase_block_49lfxxxc, + .block_erase = erase_block_82802ab, } }, .unlock = unlock_49lfxxxc, Modified: trunk/sst49lfxxxc.c ============================================================================== --- trunk/sst49lfxxxc.c Tue Mar 23 00:47:38 2010 (r971) +++ trunk/sst49lfxxxc.c Tue Mar 23 18:10:28 2010 (r972) @@ -24,19 +24,6 @@ #include "flash.h" #include "chipdrivers.h" -#define SECTOR_ERASE 0x30 -#define BLOCK_ERASE 0x20 -#define ERASE 0xD0 -#define AUTO_PGRM 0x10 -#define RESET 0xFF -#define READ_ID 0x90 -#define READ_STATUS 0x70 -#define CLEAR_STATUS 0x50 - -#define STATUS_BPS (1 << 1) -#define STATUS_ESS (1 << 6) -#define STATUS_WSMS (1 << 7) - int unlock_block_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned long address, unsigned char bits) { unsigned long lock = flash->virtual_registers + address + 2; @@ -90,21 +77,13 @@ int erase_sector_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int address, unsigned int sector_size) { - unsigned char status; + uint8_t status; chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; - chip_writeb(SECTOR_ERASE, bios); - chip_writeb(ERASE, bios + address); + chip_writeb(0x30, bios); + chip_writeb(0xD0, bios + address); - do { - status = chip_readb(bios); - if (status & (STATUS_ESS | STATUS_BPS)) { - printf("sector erase FAILED at address=0x%08lx status=0x%01x\n", bios + address, status); - chip_writeb(CLEAR_STATUS, bios); - return (-1); - } - } while (!(status & STATUS_WSMS)); - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); + status = wait_82802ab(bios); if (check_erased_range(flash, address, sector_size)) { fprintf(stderr, "ERASE FAILED!\n"); @@ -113,101 +92,6 @@ return 0; } -int erase_block_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int address, unsigned int block_size) -{ - unsigned char status; - chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; - - chip_writeb(BLOCK_ERASE, bios); - chip_writeb(ERASE, bios + address); - - do { - status = chip_readb(bios); - if (status & (STATUS_ESS | STATUS_BPS)) { - printf("block erase FAILED at address=0x%08lx status=0x%01x\n", bios + address, status); - chip_writeb(CLEAR_STATUS, bios); - return (-1); - } - } while (!(status & STATUS_WSMS)); - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); - - if (check_erased_range(flash, address, block_size)) { - fprintf(stderr, "ERASE FAILED!\n"); - return -1; - } - return 0; -} - -static int write_sector_49lfxxxc(chipaddr bios, uint8_t *src, chipaddr dst, - unsigned int page_size) -{ - int i; - unsigned char status; - - chip_writeb(CLEAR_STATUS, bios); - for (i = 0; i < page_size; i++) { - /* transfer data from source to destination */ - if (*src == 0xFF) { - dst++, src++; - /* If the data is 0xFF, don't program it */ - continue; - } - /*issue AUTO PROGRAM command */ - chip_writeb(AUTO_PGRM, bios); - chip_writeb(*src++, dst++); - - do { - status = chip_readb(bios); - if (status & (STATUS_ESS | STATUS_BPS)) { - printf("sector write FAILED at address=0x%08lx status=0x%01x\n", dst, status); - chip_writeb(CLEAR_STATUS, bios); - return (-1); - } - } while (!(status & STATUS_WSMS)); - } - - return 0; -} - -int probe_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash) -{ - chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; - uint8_t id1, id2; - - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); - - chip_writeb(READ_ID, bios); - id1 = chip_readb(bios); - id2 = chip_readb(bios + 0x01); - - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); - - printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x\n", __func__, id1, id2); - - if (!(id1 == flash->manufacture_id && id2 == flash->model_id)) - return 0; - - map_flash_registers(flash); - - return 1; -} - -int erase_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash) -{ - chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; - int i; - unsigned int total_size = flash->total_size * 1024; - - write_lockbits_49lfxxxc(flash, 0); - for (i = 0; i < total_size; i += flash->page_size) - if (erase_sector_49lfxxxc(flash, i, flash->page_size)) - return (-1); - - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); - - return 0; -} - int write_49lfxxxc(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf) { int i; @@ -226,13 +110,13 @@ /* write to the sector */ printf("%04d at address: 0x%08x", i, i * page_size); - write_sector_49lfxxxc(bios, buf + i * page_size, + write_page_82802ab(bios, buf + i * page_size, bios + i * page_size, page_size); printf("\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b"); } printf("\n"); - chip_writeb(RESET, bios); + chip_writeb(0xFF, bios); return 0; }

1 0

succesful flash write on Supermicro X8DTT-F
by Taylan Develioglu 23 Mar '10

23 Mar '10

Succesfully perfomed flashrom -w on the SM X8DTT-F, requested details are attached. Official BIOS downloads are from: http://www.supermicro.com/support/bios/

1 0

Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] Probe/Read tested for SST29EE020A
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger 23 Mar '10

23 Mar '10

On 19.02.2010 11:08, Michael Karcher wrote: > http://www.flashrom.org/pipermail/flashrom/2010-February/002318.html > > Should we commit single patches for each positive test report we get, > or collect them? > Not sure. I think collecting them and committing once a week (or something like that) would help keep the number of patches down. > --- a/flashchips.c > +++ b/flashchips.c > @@ -3763,7 +3763,7 @@ struct flashchip flashchips[] = { > .total_size = 256, > .page_size = 128, > .feature_bits = FEATURE_LONG_RESET, > - .tested = TEST_UNTESTED, > + .tested = TEST_OK_PR, > .probe = probe_jedec, > I propose to have people test probe_jedec with full address bits and restricted address bits. If both work, we might as well use the full version (same for all other operations of the chip) and note it somewhere that the upper bits are "don't care". Maybe we'll get to a point where we can run probe_jedec just once per chip size instead of once per size+addressbits+delay combination in flashchips.c which would be an alternative to the current code. Long term goal, feel free to ignore. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- "I do consider assignment statements and pointer variables to be among computer science's most valuable treasures." -- Donald E. Knuth

1 1

[PATCH] Check if 82802ab probe reads real IDs
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger 22 Mar '10

22 Mar '10

JEDEC ID probing checks the parity of the vendor ID and verifies that the ID differs from the flash chip contents. Add the same feature to 82802AB ID probing. This should reduce the number of lines we have to look at to determine if we're missing a chip definition or if we need a board enable. Just use grep on the log: grep -v "parity violation" To narrow it down further, try: grep -v "id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content" And of course you want to ignore the skipped probes: grep -v "skipped" The remaining lines are worth examining, and if those look bogus as well, you can bet that we just need a board enable. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Index: flashrom-82802ab_probe_check_parity/82802ab.c =================================================================== --- flashrom-82802ab_probe_check_parity/82802ab.c (Revision 969) +++ flashrom-82802ab_probe_check_parity/82802ab.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ { chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; uint8_t id1, id2; + uint8_t flashcontent1, flashcontent2; /* Reset to get a clean state */ chip_writeb(0xFF, bios); @@ -64,8 +65,21 @@ programmer_delay(10); - printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x\n", __func__, id1, id2); + printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x", __func__, id1, id2); + if (!oddparity(id1)) + printf_debug(", id1 parity violation"); + + /* Read the product ID location again. We should now see normal flash contents. */ + flashcontent1 = chip_readb(bios); + flashcontent2 = chip_readb(bios + 0x01); + + if (id1 == flashcontent1) + printf_debug(", id1 is normal flash content"); + if (id2 == flashcontent2) + printf_debug(", id2 is normal flash content"); + + printf_debug("\n"); if (id1 != flash->manufacture_id || id2 != flash->model_id) return 0; -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

2 2

[commit] r971 - trunk
by repository service 22 Mar '10

22 Mar '10

Author: hailfinger Date: Tue Mar 23 00:47:38 2010 New Revision: 971 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/971 Log: JEDEC ID probing checks the parity of the vendor ID and verifies that the ID differs from the flash chip contents. Add the same feature to 82802AB ID probing. This should reduce the number of lines we have to look at to determine if we're missing a chip definition or if we need a board enable. Just use grep on the log: grep -v "parity violation" To narrow it down further, try: grep -v "id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content" And of course you want to ignore the skipped probes: grep -v "skipped" The remaining lines are worth examining, and if those look bogus as well, you can bet that we just need a board enable. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Acked-by: Michael Karcher <flashrom(a)mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de> Modified: trunk/82802ab.c Modified: trunk/82802ab.c ============================================================================== --- trunk/82802ab.c Tue Mar 23 00:43:51 2010 (r970) +++ trunk/82802ab.c Tue Mar 23 00:47:38 2010 (r971) @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ { chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory; uint8_t id1, id2; + uint8_t flashcontent1, flashcontent2; /* Reset to get a clean state */ chip_writeb(0xFF, bios); @@ -64,8 +65,21 @@ programmer_delay(10); - printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x\n", __func__, id1, id2); + printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x", __func__, id1, id2); + if (!oddparity(id1)) + printf_debug(", id1 parity violation"); + + /* Read the product ID location again. We should now see normal flash contents. */ + flashcontent1 = chip_readb(bios); + flashcontent2 = chip_readb(bios + 0x01); + + if (id1 == flashcontent1) + printf_debug(", id1 is normal flash content"); + if (id2 == flashcontent2) + printf_debug(", id2 is normal flash content"); + + printf_debug("\n"); if (id1 != flash->manufacture_id || id2 != flash->model_id) return 0;

1 0

[PATCH] Reduce message severity level for skipped chips
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger 22 Mar '10

22 Mar '10

Old verbose log excerpt: Probing for Atmel AT25DF021, 256 KB: skipped. Host bus type Parallel and chip bus type SPI are incompatible. New verbose log excerpt: Probing for Atmel AT25DF021, 256 KB: skipped. This makes logs more readable and manageable. If someone really desperately wants all the bus debugging stuff, he/she can switch to SPEW mode instead of VERBOSE mode. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Index: flashrom-skip_bus_nonverbose/flashrom.c =================================================================== --- flashrom-skip_bus_nonverbose/flashrom.c (Revision 969) +++ flashrom-skip_bus_nonverbose/flashrom.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -877,20 +877,24 @@ for (flash = first_flash; flash && flash->name; flash++) { if (chip_to_probe && strcmp(flash->name, chip_to_probe) != 0) continue; - printf_debug("Probing for %s %s, %d KB: ", + msg_gdbg("Probing for %s %s, %d KB: ", flash->vendor, flash->name, flash->total_size); if (!flash->probe && !force) { - printf_debug("failed! flashrom has no probe function for this flash chip.\n"); + msg_gdbg("failed! flashrom has no probe function for " + "this flash chip.\n"); continue; } buses_common = buses_supported & flash->bustype; if (!buses_common) { tmp = flashbuses_to_text(buses_supported); - printf_debug("skipped. Host bus type %s ", tmp); + msg_gdbg("skipped."); + msg_gspew(" Host bus type %s ", tmp); free(tmp); tmp = flashbuses_to_text(flash->bustype); - printf_debug("and chip bus type %s are incompatible.\n", tmp); + msg_gspew("and chip bus type %s are incompatible.", + tmp); free(tmp); + msg_gdbg("\n"); continue; } -- "I do consider assignment statements and pointer variables to be among computer science's most valuable treasures." -- Donald E. Knuth

2 2

[commit] r970 - trunk
by repository service 22 Mar '10

22 Mar '10

Author: hailfinger Date: Tue Mar 23 00:43:51 2010 New Revision: 970 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/970 Log: Reduce message severity level for skipped chips. Old verbose log excerpt: Probing for Atmel AT25DF021, 256 KB: skipped. Host bus type Parallel and chip bus type SPI are incompatible. New verbose log excerpt: Probing for Atmel AT25DF021, 256 KB: skipped. This makes logs more readable and manageable. If someone really desperately wants all the bus debugging stuff, he/she can switch to SPEW mode instead of VERBOSE mode. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Acked-By: Michael Karcher <flashrom(a)mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de> Modified: trunk/flashrom.c Modified: trunk/flashrom.c ============================================================================== --- trunk/flashrom.c Mon Mar 22 22:48:51 2010 (r969) +++ trunk/flashrom.c Tue Mar 23 00:43:51 2010 (r970) @@ -877,20 +877,24 @@ for (flash = first_flash; flash && flash->name; flash++) { if (chip_to_probe && strcmp(flash->name, chip_to_probe) != 0) continue; - printf_debug("Probing for %s %s, %d KB: ", + msg_gdbg("Probing for %s %s, %d KB: ", flash->vendor, flash->name, flash->total_size); if (!flash->probe && !force) { - printf_debug("failed! flashrom has no probe function for this flash chip.\n"); + msg_gdbg("failed! flashrom has no probe function for " + "this flash chip.\n"); continue; } buses_common = buses_supported & flash->bustype; if (!buses_common) { tmp = flashbuses_to_text(buses_supported); - printf_debug("skipped. Host bus type %s ", tmp); + msg_gdbg("skipped."); + msg_gspew(" Host bus type %s ", tmp); free(tmp); tmp = flashbuses_to_text(flash->bustype); - printf_debug("and chip bus type %s are incompatible.\n", tmp); + msg_gspew("and chip bus type %s are incompatible.", + tmp); free(tmp); + msg_gdbg("\n"); continue; }

1 0

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
22
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

flashrom March 2010