flashrom May 2010

flashrom@flashrom.org

64 participants
169 discussions

[commit] r1003 - trunk
by repository service 22 May '10

22 May '10

Author: hailfinger Date: Sat May 22 00:28:19 2010 New Revision: 1003 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/1003 Log: Add missing nicrealtek.c which was missing from revision 1002 which was Support for Realtek RTL8139 network card flashing. Signed-off-by: Joerg Fischer <turboj(a)gmx.de> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Added: trunk/nicrealtek.c Added: trunk/nicrealtek.c ============================================================================== --- /dev/null 00:00:00 1970 (empty, because file is newly added) +++ trunk/nicrealtek.c Sat May 22 00:28:19 2010 (r1003) @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ +/* + * This file is part of the flashrom project. + * + * Copyright (C) 2009 Joerg Fischer <turboj(a)gmx.de> + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or + * (at your option) any later version. + * + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the + * GNU General Public License for more details. + * + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License + * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software + * Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA + */ + +#include <stdlib.h> +#include <string.h> +#include <sys/types.h> +#include "flash.h" + +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_REALTEK 0x10ec +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_SMC1211 0x1113 + +#define BIOS_ROM_ADDR 0xD4 +#define BIOS_ROM_DATA 0xD7 + +struct pcidev_status nics_realtek[] = { + {0x10ec, 0x8139, OK, "Realtek","rtl8139b/c PCI 10/100 Mbps"}, + {}, +}; + +struct pcidev_status nics_realteksmc1211[] = { + {0x1113, 0x1211, OK, "SMC", "SMC 1211TX rtl8139 clone 10/100 Mbps"}, + {} +}; + + +int nicrealtek_init(void) +{ + get_io_perms(); + io_base_addr = pcidev_init(PCI_VENDOR_ID_REALTEK, PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_0, + nics_realtek, programmer_param); + + buses_supported = CHIP_BUSTYPE_PARALLEL; + + return 0; +} + + +int nicsmc1211_init(void) +{ + get_io_perms(); + io_base_addr = pcidev_init(PCI_VENDOR_ID_SMC1211, PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_0, + nics_realteksmc1211, programmer_param); + + buses_supported = CHIP_BUSTYPE_PARALLEL; + + return 0; +} + +int nicrealtek_shutdown(void) +{ + free(programmer_param); + pci_cleanup(pacc); + release_io_perms(); + return 0; +} + +void nicrealtek_chip_writeb(uint8_t val, chipaddr addr) +{ + OUTL(((uint32_t)addr &0x01FFFF)|0x0A0000| (val << 24), io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_ADDR); + OUTL(((uint32_t)addr &0x01FFFF)|0x1E0000| (val << 24), io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_ADDR); +} + +uint8_t nicrealtek_chip_readb(const chipaddr addr) + +{ + uint8_t val=INB(io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_DATA); + OUTL(((uint32_t)addr & 0x01FFFF) | 0x060000 | (val << 24), io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_ADDR); + val=INB(io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_DATA); + OUTL(((uint32_t)addr & 0x01FFFF) | 0x1E0000 | (val << 24), io_base_addr + BIOS_ROM_ADDR); + return val ; + +}

1 0

[commit] r1002 - trunk
by repository service 21 May '10

21 May '10

Author: hailfinger Date: Fri May 21 23:54:07 2010 New Revision: 1002 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/1002 Log: Support for Realtek RTL8139 network card flashing. Signed-off-by: Joerg Fischer <turboj(a)gmx.de> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Modified: trunk/Makefile trunk/flash.h trunk/flashrom.c Modified: trunk/Makefile ============================================================================== --- trunk/Makefile Wed May 19 18:55:43 2010 (r1001) +++ trunk/Makefile Fri May 21 23:54:07 2010 (r1002) @@ -110,6 +110,9 @@ # Always enable Dr. Kaiser for now. CONFIG_DRKAISER ?= yes +# Always enable Realtek NICs for now. +CONFIG_NICREALTEK ?= yes + # Always enable Bus Pirate SPI for now. CONFIG_BUSPIRATESPI ?= yes @@ -181,6 +184,12 @@ NEED_PCI := yes endif +ifeq ($(CONFIG_NICREALTEK), yes) +FEATURE_CFLAGS += -D'NICREALTEK_SUPPORT=1' +PROGRAMMER_OBJS += nicrealtek.o +NEED_PCI := yes +endif + ifeq ($(CONFIG_BUSPIRATESPI), yes) FEATURE_CFLAGS += -D'BUSPIRATE_SPI_SUPPORT=1' PROGRAMMER_OBJS += buspirate_spi.o Modified: trunk/flash.h ============================================================================== --- trunk/flash.h Wed May 19 18:55:43 2010 (r1001) +++ trunk/flash.h Fri May 21 23:54:07 2010 (r1002) @@ -46,6 +46,10 @@ #if NIC3COM_SUPPORT == 1 PROGRAMMER_NIC3COM, #endif +#if NICREALTEK_SUPPORT == 1 + PROGRAMMER_NICREALTEK, + PROGRAMMER_NICREALTEK2, +#endif #if GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT == 1 PROGRAMMER_GFXNVIDIA, #endif @@ -330,7 +334,7 @@ /* print.c */ char *flashbuses_to_text(enum chipbustype bustype); void print_supported(void); -#if (NIC3COM_SUPPORT == 1) || (GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT == 1) || (DRKAISER_SUPPORT == 1) || (SATASII_SUPPORT == 1) || (ATAHPT_SUPPORT == 1) +#if (NIC3COM_SUPPORT == 1) || (GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT == 1) || (DRKAISER_SUPPORT == 1) || (SATASII_SUPPORT == 1) || (ATAHPT_SUPPORT == 1) || (NICREALTEK_SUPPORT == 1) void print_supported_pcidevs(struct pcidev_status *devs); #endif void print_supported_wiki(void); @@ -462,6 +466,18 @@ extern struct pcidev_status drkaiser_pcidev[]; #endif +/* nicrealtek.c */ +#if NICREALTEK_SUPPORT == 1 +int nicrealtek_init(void); +int nicsmc1211_init(void); +int nicrealtek_shutdown(void); +void nicrealtek_chip_writeb(uint8_t val, chipaddr addr); +uint8_t nicrealtek_chip_readb(const chipaddr addr); +extern struct pcidev_status nics_realtek[]; +extern struct pcidev_status nics_realteksmc1211[]; +#endif + + /* satasii.c */ #if SATASII_SUPPORT == 1 int satasii_init(void); Modified: trunk/flashrom.c ============================================================================== --- trunk/flashrom.c Wed May 19 18:55:43 2010 (r1001) +++ trunk/flashrom.c Fri May 21 23:54:07 2010 (r1002) @@ -47,13 +47,17 @@ * if more than one of them is selected. If only one is selected, it is clear * that the user wants that one to become the default. */ -#if NIC3COM_SUPPORT+GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT+DRKAISER_SUPPORT+SATASII_SUPPORT+ATAHPT_SUPPORT+FT2232_SPI_SUPPORT+SERPROG_SUPPORT+BUSPIRATE_SPI_SUPPORT+DEDIPROG_SUPPORT > 1 +#if NIC3COM_SUPPORT+GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT+DRKAISER_SUPPORT+SATASII_SUPPORT+ATAHPT_SUPPORT+FT2232_SPI_SUPPORT+SERPROG_SUPPORT+BUSPIRATE_SPI_SUPPORT+DEDIPROG_SUPPORT+NICREALTEK_SUPPORT > 1 #error Please enable either CONFIG_DUMMY or CONFIG_INTERNAL or disable support for all external programmers except one. #endif enum programmer programmer = #if NIC3COM_SUPPORT == 1 PROGRAMMER_NIC3COM #endif +#if NICREALTEK_SUPPORT == 1 + PROGRAMMER_NICREALTEK + PROGRAMMER_NICREALTEK2 +#endif #if GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT == 1 PROGRAMMER_GFXNVIDIA #endif @@ -159,6 +163,42 @@ }, #endif +#if NICREALTEK_SUPPORT == 1 + { + .name = "nicrealtek", + .init = nicrealtek_init, + .shutdown = nicrealtek_shutdown, + .map_flash_region = fallback_map, + .unmap_flash_region = fallback_unmap, + .chip_readb = nicrealtek_chip_readb, + .chip_readw = fallback_chip_readw, + .chip_readl = fallback_chip_readl, + .chip_readn = fallback_chip_readn, + .chip_writeb = nicrealtek_chip_writeb, + .chip_writew = fallback_chip_writew, + .chip_writel = fallback_chip_writel, + .chip_writen = fallback_chip_writen, + .delay = internal_delay, + }, + { + .name = "nicsmc1211", + .init = nicsmc1211_init, + .shutdown = nicrealtek_shutdown, + .map_flash_region = fallback_map, + .unmap_flash_region = fallback_unmap, + .chip_readb = nicrealtek_chip_readb, + .chip_readw = fallback_chip_readw, + .chip_readl = fallback_chip_readl, + .chip_readn = fallback_chip_readn, + .chip_writeb = nicrealtek_chip_writeb, + .chip_writew = fallback_chip_writew, + .chip_writel = fallback_chip_writel, + .chip_writen = fallback_chip_writen, + .delay = internal_delay, + }, +#endif + + #if GFXNVIDIA_SUPPORT == 1 { .name = "gfxnvidia",

1 0

Re: [flashrom] flashrom Digest, Vol 12, Issue 35
by Julio Barrios 20 May '10

20 May '10

Hello Guenter, Thank you for taking the time to look for info about my MB. It is very similar to the one in the picture that you asked me to look at. I guess I have found the chip that you need to know about. It was covered by a heatsink and that's why I didn't see it. I hope this is the one. If it is not I will ask a friend to take a good picture of my MB. Please let me know. The chip that I uncovered says: Intel *NH82801IR* L7395128 SLA9N On the board I can also read: Foxconn DG33M03 SE0709 Rev A00 Hope that this helps. Thank you! Julio On 20 May 2010 18:12, <flashrom-request(a)flashrom.org> wrote: > Send flashrom mailing list submissions to > flashrom(a)flashrom.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > flashrom-request(a)flashrom.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > flashrom-owner(a)flashrom.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of flashrom digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: disaster (Carl-Daniel Hailfinger) > 2. Re: disaster (Julio Barrios) > 3. Re: disaster (Carl-Daniel Hailfinger) > 4. Re: disaster (Julio Barrios) > 5. Re: disaster (Guenter) > 6. TYAN s3992 (Alessandro Gervaso) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 12:50:39 +0200 > From: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> > To: Julio Barrios <jvbn.barrios(a)yahoo.co.uk>, flashrom > <flashrom(a)flashrom.org> > Subject: Re: [flashrom] disaster > Message-ID: <4BF513FF.60006(a)gmx.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Julio, > > it seems flashrom(a)flashrom.org was left out of the conversation by > accident. I've added it back, please use the "reply all" button in the > future. > > On 20.05.2010 12:12, Julio Barrios wrote: > > Hi Carl-Daniel, Joseph and Michael, > > > > Many thanks for your replies. I very much appreciate it. I'm not sure if > a > > flash chip is the same as the BIOS chip (I'm a complete newbie here and > am > > just learning a bit, and destroying computers along the way it seems > LOL!). > > Anyway, my BIOS is a Phoenix D686 and my PC is a Dell Inspiron 530. > > > > "Phoenix D686" is probably written on a sticker. Can you peel off the > sticker and tell us what's written on the BIOS flash chip? > > > > By the look of things, I guess that I will need to buy a new motherboard. > If > > that is the case, then I will need to buy one that is compatible with > linux > > because I'm not prepared to give up Ubuntu and go back to Windows. > > > > If you need any more information so that you can help me, please let me > > know. > > > > Some people/companies in the UK offer services to reflash mainboards. > That might be what you want, but I'm not sure if the shipping cost is > worth it. > Besides that, some vendors might offer top hat flash solutions for your > board, but I'm not 100% sure about this. > > > > Again, guys, thanks a lot. > > > > Julio > > > > Good luck! > > Regards, > Carl-Daniel > > > > On 20 May 2010 09:45, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < > > c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Julio, > >> > >> please note that the method in the link can destroy your mainboard if > >> your flash chip uses a different interface (very likely). See below for > >> details. > >> > >> On 20.05.2010 09:37, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > >> > >>> On 20.05.2010 00:44, Joseph Smith wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> On 05/19/2010 06:38 PM, Michael Karcher wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> IIRC, we recently had a link showing two stacked flash chips (but I > >>>>> think they were parallel, not LPC/FWH) with some control signals only > >>>>> connected to the top one - the idea was to mount a working flash chip > >>>>> > >> on > >> > >>>>> top of the one with damaged/wrong contents without removing the lower > >>>>> one from the system. Anyone knows what I'm talking about and still > has > >>>>> the link? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/linuxbios/2007-April/020384.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>> The back-to-back socket solution (sometimes also marketed as top hat > >>> flash) would be the one which does not require soldering on the board > >>> and thus has a lower risk. > >>> > >>> > >> The best way to figure this out is to find out which flash chip you have > >> and tell us. Then we can try to find out which pins need to be bent and > >> disconnected. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Carl-Daniel > >> > >> -- > >> http://www.hailfinger.org/ > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > http://www.hailfinger.org/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 12:15:15 +0100 > From: Julio Barrios <jvbn.barrios(a)yahoo.co.uk> > To: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> > Cc: flashrom <flashrom(a)flashrom.org> > Subject: Re: [flashrom] disaster > Message-ID: > <AANLkTilTQN-bhH1p9ZNKpaKoM1lPNpMhkpFINbRb6RaK(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi Carl-Daniel, > > Sorry about not sending my message in the correct way. > > I have now peeled off the sticker. This is what is on the flash chip: > > iTE > IT8718F-S > 2M24MA L > > I hope this means something to you. > > Best regarsd, > > Julio > > On 20 May 2010 11:50, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < > c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > > Hi Julio, > > > > it seems flashrom(a)flashrom.org was left out of the conversation by > > accident. I've added it back, please use the "reply all" button in the > > future. > > > > On 20.05.2010 12:12, Julio Barrios wrote: > > > Hi Carl-Daniel, Joseph and Michael, > > > > > > Many thanks for your replies. I very much appreciate it. I'm not sure > if > > a > > > flash chip is the same as the BIOS chip (I'm a complete newbie here and > > am > > > just learning a bit, and destroying computers along the way it seems > > LOL!). > > > Anyway, my BIOS is a Phoenix D686 and my PC is a Dell Inspiron 530. > > > > > > > "Phoenix D686" is probably written on a sticker. Can you peel off the > > sticker and tell us what's written on the BIOS flash chip? > > > > > > > By the look of things, I guess that I will need to buy a new > motherboard. > > If > > > that is the case, then I will need to buy one that is compatible with > > linux > > > because I'm not prepared to give up Ubuntu and go back to Windows. > > > > > > If you need any more information so that you can help me, please let me > > > know. > > > > > > > Some people/companies in the UK offer services to reflash mainboards. > > That might be what you want, but I'm not sure if the shipping cost is > > worth it. > > Besides that, some vendors might offer top hat flash solutions for your > > board, but I'm not 100% sure about this. > > > > > > > Again, guys, thanks a lot. > > > > > > Julio > > > > > > > Good luck! > > > > Regards, > > Carl-Daniel > > > > > > > On 20 May 2010 09:45, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < > > > c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Hi Julio, > > >> > > >> please note that the method in the link can destroy your mainboard if > > >> your flash chip uses a different interface (very likely). See below > for > > >> details. > > >> > > >> On 20.05.2010 09:37, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > > >> > > >>> On 20.05.2010 00:44, Joseph Smith wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> On 05/19/2010 06:38 PM, Michael Karcher wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> IIRC, we recently had a link showing two stacked flash chips (but I > > >>>>> think they were parallel, not LPC/FWH) with some control signals > only > > >>>>> connected to the top one - the idea was to mount a working flash > chip > > >>>>> > > >> on > > >> > > >>>>> top of the one with damaged/wrong contents without removing the > lower > > >>>>> one from the system. Anyone knows what I'm talking about and still > > has > > >>>>> the link? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/linuxbios/2007-April/020384.html > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> The back-to-back socket solution (sometimes also marketed as top hat > > >>> flash) would be the one which does not require soldering on the board > > >>> and thus has a lower risk. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> The best way to figure this out is to find out which flash chip you > have > > >> and tell us. Then we can try to find out which pins need to be bent > and > > >> disconnected. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Carl-Daniel > > >> > > >> -- > > >> http://www.hailfinger.org/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.hailfinger.org/ > > > > >

2 1

Re: [flashrom] disaster
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger 20 May '10

20 May '10

Hi Julio, it seems flashrom(a)flashrom.org was left out of the conversation by accident. I've added it back, please use the "reply all" button in the future. On 20.05.2010 12:12, Julio Barrios wrote: > Hi Carl-Daniel, Joseph and Michael, > > Many thanks for your replies. I very much appreciate it. I'm not sure if a > flash chip is the same as the BIOS chip (I'm a complete newbie here and am > just learning a bit, and destroying computers along the way it seems LOL!). > Anyway, my BIOS is a Phoenix D686 and my PC is a Dell Inspiron 530. > "Phoenix D686" is probably written on a sticker. Can you peel off the sticker and tell us what's written on the BIOS flash chip? > By the look of things, I guess that I will need to buy a new motherboard. If > that is the case, then I will need to buy one that is compatible with linux > because I'm not prepared to give up Ubuntu and go back to Windows. > > If you need any more information so that you can help me, please let me > know. > Some people/companies in the UK offer services to reflash mainboards. That might be what you want, but I'm not sure if the shipping cost is worth it. Besides that, some vendors might offer top hat flash solutions for your board, but I'm not 100% sure about this. > Again, guys, thanks a lot. > > Julio > Good luck! Regards, Carl-Daniel > On 20 May 2010 09:45, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < > c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > >> Hi Julio, >> >> please note that the method in the link can destroy your mainboard if >> your flash chip uses a different interface (very likely). See below for >> details. >> >> On 20.05.2010 09:37, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: >> >>> On 20.05.2010 00:44, Joseph Smith wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 05/19/2010 06:38 PM, Michael Karcher wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> IIRC, we recently had a link showing two stacked flash chips (but I >>>>> think they were parallel, not LPC/FWH) with some control signals only >>>>> connected to the top one - the idea was to mount a working flash chip >>>>> >> on >> >>>>> top of the one with damaged/wrong contents without removing the lower >>>>> one from the system. Anyone knows what I'm talking about and still has >>>>> the link? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/linuxbios/2007-April/020384.html >>>> >>>> >>> The back-to-back socket solution (sometimes also marketed as top hat >>> flash) would be the one which does not require soldering on the board >>> and thus has a lower risk. >>> >>> >> The best way to figure this out is to find out which flash chip you have >> and tell us. Then we can try to find out which pins need to be bent and >> disconnected. >> >> Regards, >> Carl-Daniel >> >> -- >> http://www.hailfinger.org/ >> >> >> > > -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

3 4

disaster
by Julio Barrios 20 May '10

20 May '10

Hello there, I guess I have just ruined my computer. I was trying flashrom under Ubuntu 10.04. All seemed to have gone well. I turned off my PC, but...well, you surely know the rest of the story. I cannot find any way of getting it to start. Any ideas that may help me will be very much appreciated. By the way, my PC is a Dell Inspiron 530. I look forward to your reply. Julio

4 4

[PATCH] flashrom 0.9.2
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger 20 May '10

20 May '10

Finally! (And yes, I know that the release announement still needs to be written, and we have some pending bugfixes. I just want to get this out now to resume normal development, and AFAICS it has no regressions.) Increase flashrom release number to 0.9.2. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Index: flashrom-0.9.2/Makefile =================================================================== --- flashrom-0.9.2/Makefile (Revision 998) +++ flashrom-0.9.2/Makefile (Arbeitskopie) @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ # will not require subversion. The downloadable snapshots are already exported. SVNVERSION := $(shell LC_ALL=C svnversion -cn . 2>/dev/null | sed -e "s/.*://" -e "s/$[0-9]*$.*/\1/" | grep "[0-9]" || LC_ALL=C svn info . 2>/dev/null | awk '/^Revision:/ {print $$2 }' | grep "[0-9]" || LC_ALL=C git svn info . 2>/dev/null | awk '/^Revision:/ {print $$2 }' | grep "[0-9]" || echo unknown) -RELEASE := 0.9.1 +RELEASE := 0.9.2 VERSION := $(RELEASE)-r$(SVNVERSION) RELEASENAME ?= $(VERSION) -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

5 6

[commit] r1000 - trunk
by repository service 19 May '10

19 May '10

Author: hailfinger Date: Wed May 19 18:46:52 2010 New Revision: 1000 URL: http://flashrom.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/1000 Log: Increase flashrom release number to 0.9.2. Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006(a)gmx.net> Acked-by: Sean Nelson <audiohacked(a)gmail.com> Acked-by: Michael Karcher <flashrom(a)mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de> Acked-by: Luc Verhaegen <libv(a)skynet.be> Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe(a)hermann-uwe.de> Modified: trunk/Makefile Modified: trunk/Makefile ============================================================================== --- trunk/Makefile Tue May 18 01:19:22 2010 (r999) +++ trunk/Makefile Wed May 19 18:46:52 2010 (r1000) @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ # will not require subversion. The downloadable snapshots are already exported. SVNVERSION := $(shell LC_ALL=C svnversion -cn . 2>/dev/null | sed -e "s/.*://" -e "s/$[0-9]*$.*/\1/" | grep "[0-9]" || LC_ALL=C svn info . 2>/dev/null | awk '/^Revision:/ {print $$2 }' | grep "[0-9]" || LC_ALL=C git svn info . 2>/dev/null | awk '/^Revision:/ {print $$2 }' | grep "[0-9]" || echo unknown) -RELEASE := 0.9.1 +RELEASE := 0.9.2 VERSION := $(RELEASE)-r$(SVNVERSION) RELEASENAME ?= $(VERSION)

2 1

MSI K9N Neo-F v2 (MCP SPI)
by Kjell Braden 19 May '10

19 May '10

Hi, I own a MSI K9N Neo-F v2 (NVidia MCP65, Winbond W83627DHG) board. Find attached the outputs of "flashrom -V", "lspci -nnvvvxxx" and "superiotool -deV". A bios update archive can be found here at the vendors website [1], as well as a (low-res) photo [2]. HTH -Kjell [1] http://download1.msi.com/files/downloads/bos_exe/7369v29.zip [2] http://msi.com/uploads/prod_6ee5713ac0f0e194a49ec7183c185f7e.jpg

1 0

flashrom -V on Zotac 9300 ITX WIFI
by Joakim Gissberg 19 May '10

19 May '10

Attatched.

1 0

This flash part has status UNTESTED for operations: ERASE
by Németh Csaba 19 May '10

19 May '10

csaba@lucid_lynx:~/Letöltések$ sudo flashrom -EV > flashrom_EV.txt spi_block_erase_20 failed during command execution at address 0x0 csaba@lucid_lynx:~/Letöltések$ TESTED :)

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

flashrom May 2010