Subject Title is Misleading.
P5GC-MX/1333 Motherboard is Supported.please add this to flashrom mediawiki
Sorry for the trouble,
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Prakash J Kokkatt <pjkonweb(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello ,
> I am sending this report after successful flashing to latest BIOS with
> flashrom tool and as per carldani(irc name) recommendation.
> <carldani> debianguy: To add your board to the list, we need some more
> info (just to make sure we can exactly identify the board later).
> [20:28] <debianguy> <carldani> :What info is needed.
> [20:28] <carldani> debianguy: Could you send the output of "lspci
> -nnvvvxxx" and a short success report (preferably also with the logs you
> posted here), and exact name/revision/vendor of your mainboard to
> [20:29] <carldani> debianguy: Oh, and if you have superiotool installed,
> "superiotool -deV" output would be really nice to have as well.
> I have a 2.5 year Old Desktop PC with Asus P5GC-MX/1333 Motherboard(Intel
> 945GC Chipset).Asus website verifies this Motherboard By asking to Check the
> Motherboard Physically(on the Centre) to Read "Version 3.xx" For
> P5GC-MX/1333 Board.There is another board *P5GC-MX* which may not be
> confused with *P5GC-MX/1333*.
> The Version of BIOS was 0312 Which was pretty old.the latest Version is
> 0413 to which I successfully Updated.
> BIOS Source:
> My PC's MAC Address has changed after the flashing Procedure ,resulting in
> renaming of eth0 to eth1 .This warning was also shown:
> Flash image seems to be a legacy BIOS. Disabling checks.
> Writing flash chip... Erasing flash before programming... Erasing flash
> chip... *spi_block_erase_20 failed during command execution at address 0x0
> but ,showed:
>> Programming page:
>> Verifying flash... VERIFIED.
> Apart from that Flashing Procedure went fine.
> Since there are few other BIOS releases between 0312 and 0413 ,I have
> updated to intermediate version(0317) ,later on to Update to 0413(and I
> think this step is not really needed).
> Flashrom Version in Debian Repo is not the latest.So ,I built a debian
> package for My use to get latest version*0.9.2-r1043 .*
> Here are the Outputs, Logs of the Flashing Procedure ,Hoping this
> Motherboard Enters the supported list.
> *flashrom Logs:*
> *Output of "lspci -nnvvxxx" :*
> *Output of :**"superiotool -deV":*
> flashrom version used: *flashrom_0.9.2-r1043* (latest snapshot debian
> package custom built)
> superiotool on Debian:
> Package: superiotool
> Priority: extra
> Section: utils
> Installed-Size: 2196
> Maintainer: Uwe Hermann <uwe(a)debian.org>
> Architecture: amd64
> *Version: 0.0+r5050-1*
> And I want to Convey My Thanks to This Project.I was contemplating on using
> AFUDOS utility with freedos and memdisk(syslinux) and was not really
> sure.flashrom turned out to be a great tool.Appreciations and Respect.
> Prakash Jose Kokkatt
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 07:50:39PM +0800, Ramakrishna.Koduri(a)emerson.com wrote:
> Hi All,
> The Atmel AT25DF321 flash is programmed & verified with flashrom
> v0.9.2-r1001 on Emerson,ATCA-7360/R1.0/6E and the output is stated
> The flash chip(Atmel AT25DF321) is present on Intel I/O controller HUB
> (Intel ICH10R).
> It could program the device using the internal programmer with erase
> function type: 2.
> The probed flash is the one soldered down on the board.
> It went on well. Thanks for the efforts and the software.
Thanks for the report, we added the board to the list of supported ones.
Please let us know if you have further suggestions for improving the
software, we're always happy to add new features and support new
http://hermann-uwe.de | http://sigrok.orghttp://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org
I manged to successfully flash my (aging) ASRock ALiveNF6G-DVI
Mainboards Bios using Flashrom 9.2
As the output said things like "UNTESTED" and "report to
flashrom(a)flashrom.org" I'm doing that here.
flashrom -Vw output attached.
Thanks for creating flashrom.
sven === jabber/xmpp: sven(a)lankes.net
This patch adds the following chips, all untested, based on the AMIC
In comments, it also clarifies the situation surrounding the A25L40PT
and A25L40PU chips, which share the same RDID values, despite the fact
that their erase block layouts are different. Rudolf Marek tested and
confirmed the distinct erase block layouts of these chips, so I also
marked them as TEST_OK_PREW.
Finally, it adds a pretty-printer for the AMIC SPI chips, and a generic
AMIC chip type.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lenski <dlenski(a)gmail.com>