flashrom September 2011

flashrom@flashrom.org

41 participants
161 discussions

Re: [flashrom] [PATCH 2/3] serprog: small improvements
by Uwe Hermann 22 Oct '11

22 Oct '11

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 12:56:22AM +0200, Stefan Tauner wrote: > @@ -220,32 +220,27 @@ static int sp_check_commandavail(uint8_t command) > static int sp_automatic_cmdcheck(uint8_t cmd) > { > if ((sp_check_avail_automatic) && (sp_check_commandavail(cmd) == 0)) { > - msg_pdbg("Warning: Automatic command availability check" > - " failed for cmd %d - wont execute cmd\n",cmd); > + msg_pdbg("Warning: Automatic command availability check failed " > + "for cmd 0x%x - wont execute cmd\n", cmd); won't > + msg_pdbg(MSGHEADER "Bus support: parallel=%s, LPC=%s, FWH=%s, SPI=%s\n", > + (c & CHIP_BUSTYPE_PARALLEL) ? "on" : "off", > + (c & CHIP_BUSTYPE_LPC) ? "on" : "off", > + (c & CHIP_BUSTYPE_FWH) ? "on" : "off", > + (c & CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI) ? "on" : "off"); Hm, I was thinking multiple times now that maybe we should change PARALLEL to PAR in all the code, it makes places like this where LPC/FWH/SPI cases are handles align pretty nicely (same length). That's for another patch, though. Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe(a)hermann-uwe.de> Uwe. -- http://hermann-uwe.de | http://sigrok.org http://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org

2 1

flashrom log
by cjt2007 22 Oct '11

22 Oct '11

Hi flashrom people, I tried to use your tool for the ASUS M2N-MX board but failed to upgrade. Please find the verbose output attached. I hope this helps to improve your great tool. Thank you and best regards Christoph

2 3

Success report flashrom v0.9.1-r946 on motherboard ASUS M4A89GTD PRO
by Christian Kropfreiter 20 Oct '11

20 Oct '11

2 2

[PATCH] TIAO/DIYGADGET USB Multi-Protocol Adapter (TUMPA) support
by Uwe Hermann 14 Oct '11

14 Oct '11

See patch. Uwe. -- http://hermann-uwe.de | http://sigrok.org http://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org

2 2

Intel SCH Poulsbo
by MONDON Daniel 04 Oct '11

04 Oct '11

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

3 2

Re: [flashrom] My first question...
by Bernd Blaauw 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

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.

3 2

Re: [flashrom] ECS P4VXMS (V1.0A) - OK
by Stefan Tauner 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 18:23:00 -0300 Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello <marcosfrm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The flash chip is a Winbond W49F002U-12B. > > BIOS "vxmsv12c.BIN" from: > http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWebSite/Downloads/Downloads_Driver_Detail.aspx?det… > > Attached the verbose logs and lspci output. > > Marcos Hello Marcos, Thanks for your report! I have marked the chipset as OK and added the ECS P4VXMS (V1.0A) to the list of supported boards. I will commit that later together with other small changes. -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

1 0

Re: [flashrom] My first question...
by Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

2011/9/30 Jorge Fernandez Monteagudo <jorgefm(a)cirsa.com> > > Hi, > > I'm using flashrom to save the bios from my system to a file. > I've seen an unexpected behaviour and I would like to know if it's ok. > > If I run: > > # flashrom --read bios_1st.bin > # flashrom --read bios_2nd.bin > > comparing both files I can't find any difference, but If I reboot the system and > then: > > # flashrom --read bios_3rd.bin > > 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 Marcos

1 0

ASRock ALiveNF5-eSATA2+: flashrom -V
by James 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

$ sudo flashrom -V flashrom v0.9.4-r1395 on Linux 3.0.4 (x86_64), built with libpci 3.1.7, GCC 4.5.3, little endian flashrom is free software, get the source code at http://www.flashrom.org Calibrating delay loop... OS timer resolution is 1 usecs, 649M loops per second, delay more than 10% too short (got 52% of expected delay), recalculating... 842M loops per second, delay more than 10% too short (got 66% of expected delay), recalculating... 597M loops per second, delay more than 10% too short (got 62% of expected delay), recalculating... 749M loops per second, delay more than 10% too short (got 74% of expected delay), recalculating... 822M loops per second, delay loop is unreliable, trying to continue 10 myus = 8 us, 100 myus = 64 us, 1000 myus = 646 us, 10000 myus = 6992 us, 4 myus = 5 us, OK. Initializing internal programmer No coreboot table found. DMI string system-manufacturer: "To Be Filled By O.E.M." DMI string system-product-name: "To Be Filled By O.E.M." DMI string system-version: "To Be Filled By O.E.M." DMI string baseboard-manufacturer: " " DMI string baseboard-product-name: "ALiveNF5-eSATA2+ " DMI string baseboard-version: " " DMI string chassis-type: "Desktop" Found chipset "NVIDIA MCP65" with PCI ID 10de:0441. This chipset is marked as untested. If you are using an up-to-date version of flashrom please email a report to flashrom(a)flashrom.org including a verbose (-V) log. Thank you! Enabling flash write... This chipset is not really supported yet. Guesswork... ISA/LPC bridge reg 0x8a contents: 0x00, bit 6 is 0, bit 5 is 0 Flash bus type is LPC Found SMBus device 10de:0446 at 00:01:1 MCP SPI BAR is at 0x00000000 MCP SPI is not used. Please send the output of "flashrom -V" to flashrom(a)flashrom.org with your board name: flashrom -V as the subject to help us finish support for your chipset. Thanks. OK. This chipset supports the following protocols: LPC. Probing for AMIC A49LF040A, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for PMC Pm49FL002, 256 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for PMC Pm49FL004, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for SST SST49LF020, 256 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for SST SST49LF020A, 256 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for SST SST49LF040, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for SST SST49LF040B, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for SST SST49LF080A, 1024 kB: Chip lacks correct probe timing information, using default 10mS/40uS. probe_jedec_common: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for SST SST49LF160C, 2048 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for ST M50FLW040A, 512 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for ST M50FLW040B, 512 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for ST M50FLW080A, 1024 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for ST M50FLW080B, 1024 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for ST M50LPW116, 2048 kB: probe_82802ab: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for Winbond W39V040A, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for Winbond W39V040B, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Found Winbond flash chip "W39V040B" (512 kB, LPC) at physical address 0xfff80000. Lockout bits: Hardware bootblock locking (#TBL) is not active. Hardware remaining chip locking (#WP) is not active.. Probing for Winbond W39V040C, 512 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 Probing for Winbond W39V080A, 1024 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xff, id2 0xff, id1 parity violation, id1 is normal flash content, id2 is normal flash content Probing for Winbond W49V002A, 256 kB: probe_jedec_common: id1 0xda, id2 0x54 === This flash part has status UNTESTED for operations: WRITE The test status of this chip may have been updated in the latest development version of flashrom. If you are running the latest development version, please email a report to flashrom(a)flashrom.org if any of the above operations work correctly for you with this flash part. Please include the flashrom output with the additional -V option for all operations you tested (-V, -Vr, -Vw, -VE), and mention which mainboard or programmer you tested. Please mention your board in the subject line. Thanks for your help! No operations were specified. Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x6d Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x90 Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x8c Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x88

1 0

My first question...
by Jorge Fernandez Monteagudo 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

Hi, I'm using flashrom to save the bios from my system to a file. I've seen an unexpected behaviour and I would like to know if it's ok. If I run: # flashrom --read bios_1st.bin # flashrom --read bios_2nd.bin comparing both files I can't find any difference, but If I reboot the system and then: # flashrom --read bios_3rd.bin 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 Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener información privilegiada o CONFIDENCIAL. Si no es vd. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización está prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee and may contain information that is CONFIDENTIAL and protected by professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited by law. If this message has been received in error, please immediately notify us via e-mail and delete it.

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
17
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

flashrom September 2011