hi there
regarding your question on IRC and this log:
http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=840
your board (vendor) has locked a region of the flash, which we can not
unlock. intel does not provide the necessary information to us, but
only hardware vendors and bios programmers.
can you please elaborate what you want to accomplish exactly? if the
Management Engine region is not important to you, i have a few patches
that would allow you to read the other regions.
you can read a bit about the problem here:
http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2011/08/17/gsoc-2011-flashrom-part-5-–-dear-…
and on our email archive: http://www.flashrom.org/pipermail/flashrom/
please note that this mail is also addressed to our mailing list, and
your reply will (probably) also be sent there.
--
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
Hello,
Parted Magic 6.7 is available.
http://partedmagic.com/doku.php?id=changelog
root@PartedMagic:~# flashrom
flashrom v0.9.4-r1394 on Linux 3.0.4-pmagic (i686), built with libpci
3.1.7, GCC 4.6.1, little endian
Tjuess
Heino
Hi!
Flashrom V0.9.4-r1395 results:
Found chipset « Intel SCH Poulsbo”
Found SST flash chip “SST49LF008A” (1024kB, FWM) @ 0xfff00000
I am under TCL (TinyCore Linux).
Flashing Bios is OK, but erasing flash need many loops to erase all flash (from 0x1000 to 0xFF000 = 256 loops).
But sometimes, it is ok in one time.
What can I do to increase erasing speed (times) … or is there any known bug … perhaps increasing timeout … or ?
Thanks
Daniel.
Daniel MONDON
Ingénieur d'applications
LPG SYSTEMS
30, rue du Docteur Abel
BP 35
26902 VALENCE Cedex 9
Tel: +33475786881 Fax: +33475786953
http://www.lpgsystems.fr
Merci de penser à l'environnement avant d'imprimer ce message
this was fixed by retry (or so :), see below for the log of the IRC
conversation.
* cupantae (~mark@*) has joined #flashrom
<cupantae> I tried to update my bios but now even the writing the backup gives an error. What can I do?
<cupantae> I have emailed flashrom(a)flashrom.org with the report
<idwer> first thing to not do is reboot, second thing is to upload the whole output to http://paste.flashrom.org
<cupantae> ok. done
<cupantae> i'm not sure if this is helpful, but at the "VERIFY FAILED", it gave a different reason each time
<cupantae> first it was at 0x000acd00! Expected=0x23, Read=0xff, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x000fffff: 0xfe
<cupantae> then at 0x00029400! Expected=0x12, Read=0xff, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x000fffff: 0x1fc
<cupantae> then at 0x00067700! Expected=0x2f, Read=0xff, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x000fffff: 0x4ea
<cupantae> oh wait, but always 0xff
<agaran> what machine it is
<cupantae> it's there in http://paste.flashrom.org
<cupantae> it's a geforce6100pm-m2
<agaran> video card?
<cupantae> no that's the name of the motherboard
<cupantae> named after the onboard graphics, it would seem
<agaran> hmm, i never tried upgrading bios on such combo board, but if on internal programmer you get changing reads its *WEIRD*
<agaran> cupantae: can you dump few times actual flash content to new file each time (and not overwriting first backup), then calc md5 over those and show us?
<cupantae> you mean with flashrom -r?
<agaran> yes
<cupantae> ok
<agaran> but please do not overwrite backup
<cupantae> ok. i'm starting "dump1"
<cupantae> without flashing the rom in between, the md5 stayed the same
<cupantae> 625ad915d91e7b134b48aef0105a640b
<cupantae> currently flashing again with the updated version of the bios
<agaran> so it fails on write but in different things
<agaran> so now it worked?
<cupantae> well, attempting to flash, i suppose i should say
<agaran> ok, so verification now against backup passes?
<cupantae> oh my god, it verified this time
<cupantae> i didn't change anything, so is it reasonable to be nervous about rebooting?
<agaran> so if you did backup and assuming read is always correct then i should its quite safe
<agaran> but still i would be somewhat uncertain why it failed at different addresses each time on verify
<cupantae> it does seem strange. that said, i'm not at all familiar with this stuff :-)
<agaran> it is strange
<cupantae> the output is the same before the verifying stage, btw
<cupantae> between the working and failing attempts
<cupantae> anyway, i suppose i don't need your help any more! thanks for your time
<cupantae> so will i reboot and tell you if it worked?
* cupantae has quit (Quit: rebooting)
* cupantae (~mark@*) has joined #flashrom
<cupantae> agaran: back on post-reboot.
<cupantae> seems like a fairly shitty "upgrade" but what harm :-P
<cupantae> thanks for all the support!
* cupantae has quit (Client Quit)
--
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
Op 30-9-2011 19:09, Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello schreef:
>> I get differences with the previous one. I haven't enter in the bios or change
>> anything... I was expecting no differences between them. Am I missing
>> anything?
>>
>> Regards
>> Jorge
>
> http://flashrom.org/Random_notes#Bios_content_changes_between_reboots
It might be usefull if Flashrom gets a percentage counter:
'file savebios.bin is 99.3% identical to EEPROM contents, continue at
your own risk. It's also 50.0 % identical to file asusbios.bin'
instead of something along the lines of 'verification failed, file is
corrupt'.
Above example would also require a way to reference a 2nd file to verify
against. Let's say that 2nd file is an internet-downloaded original
motherboard vendor's BIOS instead of a flashrom dumped file.
After all, people might want to check if flashrom works correctly before
writing anything. What better way than dump current bios, compare dumped
file to bios but also compare to vendor bios file. All 3 should be
(near-)identical.
