Hi,
we're hitting the 80 column limit in our code in ways which actually
reduce readability for the code. Examples are various multiline messages
and complicated nested code where refactoring to a separate function
doesn't make sense.
Keeping the old 80 column limit is not really an option anymore.
Standard terminal sizes have one of 80, 100 or 132 columns.
Given the monitor resolutions many people have nowadays, I think it is
safe to say that you can fit two xterms with 100 columns horizonally
next to each other. 100 columns should also be sufficient for a msg_p*
of roughly 80 columns of text.
132 columns provide more leeway, but IMHO that would be too wide for
good readability (and my screen can't fit two xterms side-by-side anymore).
Of course some files have sections where any column limit is not
acceptable (board lists etc.), but the column limit violations should be
limited to the affected file sections, not whole files.
Comments?
I'd like to get this decided today or tomorrow so we know where we need
line breaks in Stefan Tauner's new struct flashchip patch.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
I have a spansion S25FL128P......X chip and can do some tests.
The "problem" is that i don't know if its an 0 or an 1.
On the chip i see only "FL128PIF" and one line lower i see "00299012 C".
Probing works (id1 0x01, id2 0x2018):
Calibrating delay loop... OK.
serprog: Programmer name is "serprog-duino"
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL128P......0" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL128P......1" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL128S......0" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL128S......1" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL129P......0" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Found Spansion flash chip "S25FL129P......1" (16384 kB, SPI) on serprog.
Multiple flash chip definitions match the detected chip(s):
"S25FL128P......0", "S25FL128P......1", "S25FL128S......0",
"S25FL128S......1", "S25FL129P......0", "S25FL129P......1"
Please specify which chip definition to use with the -c <chipname> option.
BTW: Chip was fund on a Dell-Systemboard.
Hi,
I'm trying to find out which external programmers should be supported next.
1. There was talk of an AVR-based new programmer using the serprog
protocol on IRC by someone with the nick "coldelectrons", but I have no
idea if he/she is reading this mail. IMHO more hardware using the
serprog protocol is always a good idea.
2. All those Willem/Sivava variants. People regularly request those, but
I don't think anyone in here owns the hardware.
3. RayeR's SPIPGM. I have a preliminary patch which could work, but I
don't have the hardware. Will send the patch to the list soon.
4. LPC^2, Milksop, CheapLPC and other programmers from the Xbox modding
community.
5. Dozens of SPI programmer hardware projects scattered over the net.
Too many to count, and I'm not sure which of them has more than one user.
In general, it seems creating a new programmer hardware design is like
writing IRC clients: A nice way to get started in the field. I have no
problems merging flashrom support for all of them, but I won't implement
support for all of them myself.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:20:19 +0200
Mattias Mattsson <vitplister(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was able to run flashrom under Linux on PPC (big endian) hardware
> with two small modifications in internal.c and processor_enable.c (see
> attached patch). Not sure if this is the right way to do it but it
> seems to work for me.
>
i am resending this patch (unchanged) because patchwork did not pick it
up correctly. please do send one patch per mail only in the future
until we have something really working. :)
--
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
Hi again
I have now tryed with frser-duino from "Urja Rannikko".
With other chips i have better results (for example with the M25P10,
this chips is working now).
But the MX25L6445E is still not working.
After a long time flashrom trys other erase options, but all failed.
Have a look here (cut from log):
...............-0x0f5fff:E, 0x0f6000-0x0f6fff:E, 0x0f7000-0x0f7fff:E,
0x0f8000-0x0f8fff:E, 0x0f9000-0x0f9fff:E, 0x0fa000-0x0fafff:E,
0x0fb000-0x0fbfff:E, 0x0fc000-0x0fcfff:E, 0x0fd000-0x0fdfff:E,
0x0fe000-0x0fefff:E, 0x0ff000-0x0fffff:E, 0x100000-0x100fff:EFAILED at
0x00100000! Expected=0xff, Found=0xeb, failed byte count from
0x00100000-0x00100fff: 0xfe5
ERASE FAILED!
Reading current flash chip contents... done. Looking for another erase
function.
Trying erase function 1... 0x000000-0x007fff:S, 0x008000-0x00ffff:S,
0x010000-0x017fff:S, 0x018000-0x01ffff:S, 0x020000-0x027fff:S,
0x028000-0x02ffff:S, 0x030000-0x037fff:S, 0x038000-0x03ffff:S,
0x040000-0x047fff:S, 0x048000-0x04ffff:S, 0x050000-0x057fff:S,
0x058000-0x05ffff:S, 0x060000-0x067fff:S, 0x068000-0x06ffff:S,
0x070000-0x077fff:S, 0x078000-0x07ffff:S, 0x080000-0x087fff:S,
0x088000-0x08ffff:S, 0x090000-0x097fff:S, 0x098000-0x09ffff:S,
0x0a0000-0x0a7fff:S, 0x0a8000-0x0affff:S, 0x0b0000-0x0b7fff:S,
0x0b8000-0x0bffff:S, 0x0c0000-0x0c7fff:S, 0x0c8000-0x0cffff:S,
0x0d0000-0x0d7fff:S, 0x0d8000-0x0dffff:S, 0x0e0000-0x0e7fff:S,
0x0e8000-0x0effff:S, 0x0f0000-0x0f7fff:S, 0x0f8000-0x0fffff:S,
0x100000-0x107fff:EFAILED at 0x00100000! Expected=0xff, Found=0xeb,
failed byte count from 0x00100000-0x00107fff: 0x7f69
ERASE FAILED!
Reading current flash chip contents... done. Looking for another erase
function.
Trying erase function 2... 0x000000-0x00ffff:S, 0x010000-0x01ffff:S,
0x020000-0x02ffff:S, 0x030000-0x03ffff:S, 0x040000-0x04ffff:S,
0x050000-0x05ffff:S, 0x060000-0x06ffff:S, 0x070000-0x07ffff:S,
0x080000-0x08ffff:S, 0x090000-0x09ffff:S, 0x0a0000-0x0affff:S,
0x0b0000-0x0bffff:S, 0x0c0000-0x0cffff:S, 0x0d0000-0x0dffff:S,
0x0e0000-0x0effff:S, 0x0f0000-0x0fffff:S, 0x100000-0x10ffff:EFAILED at
0x00100000! Expected=0xff, Found=0xeb, failed byte count from
0x00100000-0x0010ffff: 0xfb20
ERASE FAILED!
Reading current flash chip contents... done. Looking for another erase
function.
Trying erase function 3... 0x000000-0x7fffff:EFAILED at 0x00100000!
Expected=0xff, Found=0xeb, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x007fffff:
0x26be30
ERASE FAILED!
Reading current flash chip contents... done. Looking for another erase
function.
Trying erase function 4... 0x000000-0x7fffff:EFAILED at 0x00100000!
Expected=0xff, Found=0xeb, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x007fffff:
0x26be30
ERASE FAILED!
Looking for another erase function.
No usable erase functions left.
FAILED!
As you can see it always fails at the same byte count. I am still not
sure if this problem is related to serprog/frser-duino.
It looks like the chip is write protected or something like that.
2015-07-29 20:38 GMT+02:00 Ignatius Grippa <ignatiusgrippa(a)gmx.com>:
> Hello,
>
> First time posting.
>
> I cannot get my Am29F010 EEPROM recognized by flashrom v0.9.8-r1889
That chip *should* be detected:
http://www.flashrom.org/Supported_hardware#Supported_flash_chips
>
> I'm using a 3Com PCI ethernet card (3C90xB) that recognizes the EEPROM
> using a different program "bromutil"
So what does [b|c|oc]romutil [1] do what the code in flashrom's
nic3com.c doesn't do?
http://git.etherboot.org/gpxe.git/tree/90bffed805ec453d2f75e61157b73eb2bb6b…
> I've also tested my 3Com using a different chip AT29C010 which is recognized
> & reads/writes with flashrom so I think it must be a software issue with the
> AMD.
>
> I can get flashrom to read the AMD to a file if I do a force -f -c
> Am29F010A/B but no write because it's not recognized.
Forcing shouldn't be necessary...
> I've attached my log. Seems flashrom is not reading the id codes correctly
> for the AMD. Instead it reads the first 2 bytes of info stored on the chip
> (4c ef in the log) However, probing for Atmel and many others retrieves the
> correct manufacturer/model id codes for the AM29F010 which is 01 20
>
> Any clue what might be happening? Thanks very much.
>
> Dave
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> flashrom mailing list
> flashrom(a)flashrom.org
> http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom