May 2012 - flashrom - mail.coreboot.org

Re: [flashrom] [coreboot] Dualbios on GA-MA770-UD3
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger Aug. 10, 2013

Aug. 10, 2013

Hi Vadim, thanks for your mail. I have added the flashrom mailing list in CC: because we should develop a generic way to handle DualBIOS and similar techniques. On 09.04.2010 08:12, Vadim Girlin wrote: > I'm going to try coreboot on Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3. > It's AMD 770 (RX780 / SB700). > > My motherboard supports hardware dual bios - with two chips on it. > I'm going to try flashing backup chip and boot from it. It seems to be > possible - I've tested it (flashing at least). Chips on this board could > be switched by changing bit 0 at undocumented register EF on LDN 7 of > IT8720. I can use slightly patched flashrom for accessing any chip I > want without any problems. And this is tested many times. > > My idea is to use backup chip for debugging - that always keeps my > chance to reboot from main bios chip. And removes the need for > desoldering etc. > > And second problem is that original bios is checking second chip - and > trying to recover it by flashing the bios from main chip on reboot? > rewriting coreboot. AFAICS this could be solved by including some > signatures etc. It seems to be easy to find out. May be someone is > working on this? > > BTW I can send the patch for flashrom - but I think that with > information I mentioned above somebody could make it much better than my > ugly hack. I hope the regs should be the same for all latest Gigabyte > MBs using IT8720/18 > It would be great if you could send that patch. It will help us make a flashrom design decision that works for all boards with multiple flash chips. By the way, some of us have good contacts at ITE, so we can ask ITE for details about the undocumented registers. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

5 12

[RFC] Layout handling...
by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger July 12, 2013

July 12, 2013

Hi, before we change flashrom to work with current layout requirements, we should summarize the features we need/want, and then decide how to handle the individual layout regions internally. Terms: "write strategy" describes a combination of erase+write commands with a given block size, touching some blocks. "read protected" describes a region which can not be read. "write protected" describes a region which can not be written. "write once" describes a region which can be written exactly once in the chip lifetime. If you add a feature to the list, please give it a nickname so we know which feature people are referring to. Some of the features below might not be desirable, but I want to list them anyway so we can explicitly declare them as unsupported if needed. fullwrite-unrestricted: Write a chip-sized image, no special read/write restrictions of the chip, no layout file needs to be specified. Default write case right now. fullwrite-noread: Write a chip-sized image, reading anything from the chip is not possible. Many DVD writers fall in that category. No verification, violates our reliability guarantees. fullwrite-postread: Write a chip-sized image, reading anything from the chip is only possible after write. Chips which are read-locked until a full erase/write fall in that category. Do those exist as standalone flash chips or only integrated into processors? fullwrite-partialread: Write a chip-sized image, reading is only possible in some chip regions. Only partial verification, violates our reliability guarantees. fullwrite-partialwrite: Write a chip-sized image, but writing is only possible in some regions. This is obviously a conflict unless the image has the same contents as the chip in the write-protected regions and there is a possible write strategy for the whole image which does not touch the write-protected regions. Should flashrom always refuse this scenario, or only refuse it in case of conflicts? partialwrite-unrestricted: Write only parts of an image, the rest of the chip contents is kept, no special read/write restrictions. partialwrite-partialread: Write only parts of an image, the rest of the chip contents is kept, reading is only possible in some chip regions. If no read-protected regions are written and a suitable write strategy exists, should flashrom warn? If a read-protected region is written, should flashrom warn/refuse due to reliability requirements? partialwrite-partialwrite: Write only parts of an image, the rest of the chip contents is kept, writing is only possible in some chip regions. If no write-protected regions are written and a suitable write strategy exists, should flashrom warn? flashrom will refuse to write a write-protected region. fullread-unrestricted: Read the full chip, no special read restrictions of the chip. partialread-unrestricted: Read only parts of a chip, no special read restrictions of the chip. partialread-partialread: Read only parts of a chip, some regions are read-protected. flashrom should refuse to read any read-protected regions. partialread-imagefiller: If only parts of a chip are read and the read image has full chip size, what should be used as filler for unread regions? 0x00 or 0xff? partialread-layout-imagesize: If only parts of a chip are read, should the read image still have full chip size with all read regions filled in at the respective locations? partialread-layout-split: If only parts of a chip are read, should it be possible to write each region (or a combination thereof) to a separate image file, and would that mapping be specified in the layout file? partialwrite-layout-split: If only parts of a chip are written, should it be possible to collect each part of the new image from a separate image file, and would that mapping be specified in the layout file? readwrite-protection-time: Which read protection and write protection times exist? Temporary lock until unlock, temporary lock until chip soft reset, temporary lock until chip/programmer hard reset (powerdown or reset line), permanent eternal lock. readwrite-protection-type: Which read protection and write protection types exist? Programmer lock (e.g. Intel SPI), hardware chip lock (WP pin), software chip lock (chip command). readwrite-protection-interaction: How should we express this situation: A region is write-locked with a software chip lock, but to remove that software chip lock, a hardware chip lock has to be disabled first, then the software chip lock can be disabled. partialaccess-crash: Some regions in the chip are really off-limits and will cause an unrecoverable error (system crash) when accessed (read or write). That seems to be the case for some EC/flash interactions. Comments? Any forks of flashrom (e.g. chromium) which need infrastructure features not mentioned above? Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

5 12

Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] automatically round address ranges requested from physmap_common to page boundaries
by Stefan Tauner Dec. 31, 2012

Dec. 31, 2012

On Mon, 30 May 2011 02:45:44 +0200 Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner(a)student.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > this patch also changes the display width of all addresses in physmap.c to 16 hex characters. > > FIXME: what about unmappings? > munmap is safe. > djgpp's __dpmi_free_physical_address_mapping: unknown. > DirectHW's unmap_physical: unknown. > > FIXME: jakllsch suggested using PRIx64 instead of x, because it's more portable FIXME: in the case we can not map and 'mayfail' is true we should return ERROR_PTR instead of ERROR_PTR + diff -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

1 1

[PATCH] Enable VX855 chipset
by John Schmerge Oct. 21, 2012

Oct. 21, 2012

This patch adds support for the Via VX855 chipset

4 8

VIA VT6421A
by Magyar Szabolcs Sept. 30, 2012

Sept. 30, 2012

Hi, I post a success story about a VIA VT6421A based SATA/PATA PCI controller. The flashrom can probe/read/write successfully the onboard PMC Pm49FL004 chip. I downloaded the patch from http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/3214/. Just one thing... "BAR type unknown..." I don't known the meaning, but it worked for me without errors. Please add the patch from above to the trunk. I attached a verbose probe output too. flashrom v0.9.3-r1362 on Linux 2.6.38-std220-i586 (i686), built with libpci 3.0.0, GCC 4.3.2, little endian flashrom is free software, get the source code at http://www.flashrom.org Calibrating delay loop... OK. Found "VIA VT6421A" (1106:3249, BDF 00:0a.0). BAR type unknown, please report a bug at flashrom(a)flashrom.org === This PCI device is UNTESTED. Please report the 'flashrom -p xxxx' output to flashrom(a)flashrom.org if it works for you. Please add the name of your PCI device to the subject. Thank you for your help! === Found chip "PMC Pm49FL004" (512 kB, LPC, FWH) on atavia. Reading flash... done. Best regards, Szabolcs Magyar P.S.: Sorry for my english.

3 5

2 flashes on SPI bus
by Andrei Dolnikov Sept. 23, 2012

Sept. 23, 2012

Hello folks, I would like to use a flashrom utility to access 2 serial flashes on the SPI bus of my x86 board, but I'm struggling with the second one. So I'm looking for any help, hints or advices which can help me to solve this issue. I have custom x86 board (Atom n450 CPU, ICH8M chipset) which have 2 serial flashes installed on it. The first one is SST25VF016B and the second one is Numonyx M45PE16. The M45PE16 is pretty the similar to the M25PE16. Both this chips are connected to the SPI bus of the ICH8M chipset, the CS (chip select) signal of the SST25VF is routed to the SPI_CS0 and the CS signal of the M45PE16 is routed to the SPI_CS1. I can successfully read, erase and write the SST flash. Trying to figure out if flashrom utility can find the second Numonyx flash I've added the proper description for it to the flashchips.c (actually I've leaved it the same as for M25PE16 but changed model_id field). Unfortunately it didn't help me at all. So I'm wondering if flashrom can't find M45PE16 flash because of cleared SPI_CS1 signal and how can I enable it? Does flashrom utility support such kind of configurations or does it simply searching for the flash on CS0? Probably some of you have some ideas on enabling SPI_CS1 or even some useful links etc. Unfortunately the official Intel ICH8M documentation looks kind of complicated and no so clear to me. I'll of course digg into it but any help, hints or advices are highly appreciated! Thanks in advance, xborodax.

2 1

#5: Winbond W25Q128 for ICH
by flashrom Sept. 18, 2012

Sept. 18, 2012

#5: Winbond W25Q128 for ICH ----------------------------------+--------------------------- Reporter: rheneus.paul@… | Owner: hailfinger Type: defect | Status: new Priority: critical | Milestone: Component: flashrom | Version: Keywords: | Dependencies: Patch Status: there is no patch | ----------------------------------+--------------------------- I could not use flashrom 0.9.3 -r1205 to detect Winbond W25Q128 to program BIOS. Attached the read log Just by adding WINBOND_NEX_W25Q128 0x4018 in flashchips.c for W25Q128, similar to W25Q64 throws run Opcode 0x3 error for read. Attached Verbose log of read -- Ticket URL: <http://www.flashrom.org/trac/flashrom/ticket/5> flashrom <http://www.flashrom.org/>

1 2

Add support for unlock and write to Atmel AT26F040
by tim＠buttersideup.com Sept. 18, 2012

Sept. 18, 2012

Add support for unlock and write to Atmel AT26F040 SPI 512k chips. Tested using a bus pirate only. I'm unavailble for a couple of weeks imminently, but will reply on return if pos... Cheers, Tim. ~# flashrom -c AT26F004 -p buspirate_spi:dev=/dev/ttyUSB0 -Vw rr620WDA-read-rom-image flashrom v0.9.3-r1349 on Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (i686), built with libpci 3.1.7, GCC 4.4.5, little endian flashrom is free software, get the source code at http://www.flashrom.org Calibrating delay loop... OS timer resolution is 1 usecs, 1088M loops per second, 10 myus = 10 us, 100 myus = 95 us, 1000 myus = 945 us, 10000 myus = 9495 us, 4 myus = 5 us, OK. Initializing buspirate_spi programmer SPI speed is 8MHz Raw bitbang mode version 1 Raw SPI mode version 1 Probing for Atmel AT26F004, 512 kB: probe_spi_rdid_generic: id1 0x1f, id2 0x400 Chip status register is 1c Found chip "Atmel AT26F004" (512 kB, SPI) on buspirate_spi. === This flash part has status UNTESTED for operations: PROBE READ ERASE 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! Some block protection in effect, disabling All write protection disabled! Reading old flash chip contents... Erasing and writing flash chip... Looking at blockwise erase function 0... trying... 0x000000-0x000fff:EW, 0x001000-0x001fff:W, 0x002000-0x002fff:S, 0x003000-0x003fff:S, 0x004000-0x004fff:S, 0x005000-0x005fff:S, 0x006000-0x006fff:S, 0x007000-0x007fff:S, 0x008000-0x008fff:S, 0x009000-0x009fff:S, 0x00a000-0x00afff:S, 0x00b000-0x00bfff:S, 0x00c000-0x00cfff:W, 0x00d000-0x00dfff:S, 0x00e000-0x00efff:S, 0x00f000-0x00ffff:S, 0x010000-0x010fff:EW, 0x011000-0x011fff:EW, 0x012000-0x012fff:EW, 0x013000-0x013fff:EW, 0x014000-0x014fff:EW, 0x015000-0x015fff:W, 0x016000-0x016fff:W, 0x017000-0x017fff:S, 0x018000-0x018fff:S, 0x019000-0x019fff:S, 0x01a000-0x01afff:S, 0x01b000-0x01bfff:S, 0x01c000-0x01cfff:S, 0x01d000-0x01dfff:S, 0x01e000-0x01efff:S, 0x01f000-0x01ffff:S, 0x020000-0x020fff:EW, 0x021000-0x021fff:W, 0x022000-0x022fff:W, 0x023000-0x023fff:W, 0x024000-0x024fff:W, 0x025000-0x025fff:W, 0x026000-0x026fff:W, 0x027000-0x027fff:W, 0x028000-0x028fff:W, 0x029000-0x029fff:W, 0x02a000-0x02aff f:W, 0x02b000-0x02bfff:W, 0x02c000-0x02cfff:W, 0x02d000-0x02dfff:W, 0x02e000-0x02efff:W, 0x02f000-0x02ffff:W, 0x030000-0x030fff:W, 0x031000-0x031fff:W, 0x032000-0x032fff:W, 0x033000-0x033fff:W, 0x034000-0x034fff:W, 0x035000-0x035fff:W, 0x036000-0x036fff:W, 0x037000-0x037fff:W, 0x038000-0x038fff:W, 0x039000-0x039fff:W, 0x03a000-0x03afff:W, 0x03b000-0x03bfff:W, 0x03c000-0x03cfff:W, 0x03d000-0x03dfff:S, 0x03e000-0x03efff:S, 0x03f000-0x03ffff:S, 0x040000-0x040fff:S, 0x041000-0x041fff:S, 0x042000-0x042fff:S, 0x043000-0x043fff:S, 0x044000-0x044fff:S, 0x045000-0x045fff:S, 0x046000-0x046fff:S, 0x047000-0x047fff:S, 0x048000-0x048fff:S, 0x049000-0x049fff:S, 0x04a000-0x04afff:S, 0x04b000-0x04bfff:S, 0x04c000-0x04cfff:S, 0x04d000-0x04dfff:S, 0x04e000-0x04efff:S, 0x04f000-0x04ffff:S, 0x050000-0x050fff:S, 0x051000-0x051fff:S, 0x052000-0x052fff:S, 0x053000-0x053fff:S, 0x054000-0x054fff:S, 0x055000-0x055fff:S, 0x056000-0x056fff:S, 0x057000-0x057fff:S, 0x058000-0x058fff:S, 0x059000-0x059fff: S, 0x05a000-0x05afff:S, 0x05b000-0x05bfff:W, 0x05c000-0x05cfff:W, 0x05d000-0x05dfff:S, 0x05e000-0x05efff:S, 0x05f000-0x05ffff:S, 0x060000-0x060fff:S, 0x061000-0x061fff:S, 0x062000-0x062fff:S, 0x063000-0x063fff:S, 0x064000-0x064fff:S, 0x065000-0x065fff:S, 0x066000-0x066fff:S, 0x067000-0x067fff:S, 0x068000-0x068fff:S, 0x069000-0x069fff:S, 0x06a000-0x06afff:S, 0x06b000-0x06bfff:S, 0x06c000-0x06cfff:S, 0x06d000-0x06dfff:S, 0x06e000-0x06efff:S, 0x06f000-0x06ffff:S, 0x070000-0x070fff:S, 0x071000-0x071fff:S, 0x072000-0x072fff:S, 0x073000-0x073fff:S, 0x074000-0x074fff:S, 0x075000-0x075fff:S, 0x076000-0x076fff:S, 0x077000-0x077fff:S, 0x078000-0x078fff:S, 0x079000-0x079fff:S, 0x07a000-0x07afff:S, 0x07b000-0x07bfff:S, 0x07c000-0x07cfff:S, 0x07d000-0x07dfff:S, 0x07e000-0x07efff:S, 0x07f000-0x07ffff:S Done. Verifying flash... VERIFIED. Raw bitbang mode version 1 Bus Pirate shutdown completed. Signed-off-by: Tim Small <tim(a)seoss.co.uk> Index: at25.c =================================================================== --- at25.c (revision 1349) +++ at25.c (working copy) @@ -215,6 +215,8 @@ /* spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df is not really the right way to do * this, but the side effects of said function work here as well. */ + /* FIXME? This does a global unlock, but at25f don't have this command? + */ return spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df(flash); } @@ -285,3 +287,71 @@ } return 0; } + + +int spi_disable_blockprotect_at26f040(struct flashchip *flash) +{ + uint8_t status; + uint32_t i; + int result; + + /* See Page 19 * + * http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod_documents/doc3588.pdf */ + + /* Write Protect Pin status: 0 == cannot set SPRL to 0 (unlocked) */ + const uint8_t stat_bit_WPP = (1 << 4); + + /* Software Protection Status: 00 == all sectors unprotected */ + const uint8_t stat_bit_SWP = (3 << 2); + + /* Sector Protection registers locked: 0 == unlocked. * + * Cannot be set to 0 if WPP is 1 (hardware lock). */ + const uint8_t stat_bit_SPRL = (1 << 7); + + /* Page 6 */ + const uint8_t at26f004_unprotect_sector = 0x39; + + status = spi_read_status_register(); + /* If block protection is disabled, OK to go ahead, stop here. */ + if ((status & stat_bit_SWP) == 0) + return 0; + + msg_cdbg("Some block protection in effect, disabling\n"); + if (status & stat_bit_SPRL) { + msg_cdbg("Need to disable Sector Protection Register Lock\n"); + if ((status & stat_bit_WPP) == 0) { + msg_cerr("The chips write-protect pin is being " + "asserted (driven low) by external hardware." + "\nWriting is impossible :-(.\n"); + return 1; + } + /* All bits except bit 7 (SPRL) are readonly. */ + /* Unlock sector protection registers. */ + result = spi_write_status_register(flash, status & ~stat_bit_SPRL); + if (result) { + msg_cerr("spi_write_status_register failed\n"); + return result; + } + + } + /* Call unprotect sector on each sector. We need to give an address */ + /* within each sector, and the smallest sector is 8KB. */ + for (i = 0; i < 0x80000; i += 0x1000) { + const unsigned char cmd[4] = { at26f004_unprotect_sector, + (i >> 16) & 0xff, + (i >> 8) & 0xff, + i & 0xff}; + /* set the chip's "WEL" write latch - WREN (Write Enable) */ + spi_write_enable(); + spi_send_command(sizeof(cmd), 0, cmd, NULL); + } + status = spi_read_status_register(); + if ((status & stat_bit_SWP) != 0) { + msg_cerr("Block protection could not be disabled!\n"); + return 1; + } else { + msg_cerr("All write protection disabled!\n"); + } + + return 0; +} Index: spi25.c =================================================================== --- spi25.c (revision 1349) +++ spi25.c (working copy) @@ -1210,3 +1210,94 @@ return 0; } + + +/* This is for Atmel chips only (AT26F004, AT26DF161A etc.) - the 25F004 only + * does either this mode, or byte-at-a-time. */ +int spi_at26_write_sequential(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len) +{ + /* ref http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod_documents/doc3588.pdf + * page 9 etc. */ + const int AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_OUTSIZE = 5; + const int AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_CONT_OUTSIZE = 2; + const int AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_CMD = 0xaf; + uint32_t pos = start; + int result; + unsigned char cmd[4] = { + AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_CMD + }; + struct spi_command cmds[] = { + { + .writecnt = JEDEC_WREN_OUTSIZE, + .writearr = (const unsigned char[]){ JEDEC_WREN }, + .readcnt = 0, + .readarr = NULL, + }, { + .writecnt = AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_OUTSIZE, + .writearr = (const unsigned char[]){ + AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_CMD, + (start >> 16) & 0xff, + (start >> 8) & 0xff, + (start & 0xff), + buf[0] + }, + .readcnt = 0, + .readarr = NULL, + }, { + .writecnt = 0, + .writearr = NULL, + .readcnt = 0, + .readarr = NULL, + }}; + + switch (spi_programmer->type) { +#if CONFIG_INTERNAL == 1 +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) + case SPI_CONTROLLER_IT87XX: + case SPI_CONTROLLER_WBSIO: + msg_perr("%s: impossible with this SPI controller," + " degrading to byte program\n", __func__); + return spi_chip_write_1(flash, buf, start, len); +#endif +#endif + default: + break; + } + + cmds[1].writearr = (const unsigned char[]){ + 0xAF, + (pos >> 16) & 0xff, + (pos >> 8) & 0xff, + (pos & 0xff), + buf[pos - start] + }; + + + result = spi_send_multicommand(cmds); + if (result) { + msg_cerr("%s failed during start command execution\n", + __func__); + /* FIXME: Should we send WRDI here as well to make sure the chip + * is not in seuquential wirte mode? + */ + return result; + } + while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) + programmer_delay(5); + + pos ++; + + while (pos < start + len) { + cmd[1] = buf[pos++ - start]; + spi_send_command(AT26_SEQ_BYTE_WRITE_CONT_OUTSIZE, 0, cmd, NULL); + while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) + programmer_delay(5); + } + + /* Use WRDI to exit sequential write mode. This needs to be done before + * issuing any other non-sequential-byte-write commands. + */ + spi_write_disable(); + + return 0; +} Index: flashchips.c =================================================================== --- flashchips.c (revision 1349) +++ flashchips.c (working copy) @@ -1883,6 +1883,7 @@ }, .printlock = spi_prettyprint_status_register_atmel_at26df081a, .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect, + /* Should support spi_at26_write_sequential too, but it's untested */ .write = spi_chip_write_256, .read = spi_chip_read, .voltage = {2700, 3600}, @@ -1914,6 +1915,7 @@ .model_id = ATMEL_AT26F004, .total_size = 512, .page_size = 256, + .feature_bits = FEATURE_WRSR_WREN, .tested = TEST_UNTESTED, .probe = probe_spi_rdid, .probe_timing = TIMING_ZERO, @@ -1936,7 +1938,9 @@ .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7, } }, - .write = NULL /* Incompatible Page write */, + .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect_at26f040, + /* also supports spi_chip_write_1, but nothing else */ + .write = spi_at26_write_sequential, .read = spi_chip_read, .voltage = {2700, 3600}, }, Index: chipdrivers.h =================================================================== --- chipdrivers.h (revision 1349) +++ chipdrivers.h (working copy) @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ int spi_read_chunked(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len, int chunksize); int spi_write_chunked(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len, int chunksize); int spi_aai_write(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len); +int spi_at26_write_sequential(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len); /* a25.c */ int spi_prettyprint_status_register_amic_a25l05p(struct flashchip *flash); @@ -74,6 +75,7 @@ int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25f(struct flashchip *flash); int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25fs010(struct flashchip *flash); int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25fs040(struct flashchip *flash); +int spi_disable_blockprotect_at26f040(struct flashchip *flash); /* 82802ab.c */ uint8_t wait_82802ab(struct flashchip *flash);

3 4

Flashing M/B Bios (Asus P5LD2-VM) goes wrong
by Emil Sirbu Sept. 7, 2012

Sept. 7, 2012

Hello, I have an ASUS P5LD2-VM, and I try to update bios, first with flashrom v0.9.2-r1028 ( http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=489 ) then with 0.9.3 ( http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=490 also, the ROM is at http://paste.flashrom.org/uploads/491.bin ) but: Writing flash chip... Erasing flash chip... Looking at blockwise erase function 0... trying... 0x000000-0x000fff, 0x001000-0x001fff, 0x002000-0x002fff, 0x003000-0xff, 0x004000-0x004fff, 0x005000-0x005fff, ERASE FAILED at 0x00005760! Expected=0xff, Read=0x50, failed byte count from 0x00005000-0x00005fff: 0x87a ERASE FAILED! Can you help whit this? I'm carco on freenode/#flashrom channel Thank you, Emil Sirbu

3 4

Gembird-PCI-VIA VT6421A-W39V040C
by Alexey Sept. 5, 2012

Sept. 5, 2012

Hi! I'm going to flash Gembird PCI 3SATA+1IDE controller's BIOS, there is W39V040C. I found an excellent professionaly modified ROM for this device. I will try to do it on board of ASUS P4P800E-DELUX. Just let me know, is it possible in the moment or I have to wait for a new version of flashrom.exe? This device have unfriendly relations to Radeon X1600 AGP, on board of ASRock P4i45E MB, so I found only new modified ROM of PCI controller can help. Waiting for Your answer, Alexey.

2 4