flashrom

flashrom@flashrom.org

3 participants
9189 discussions

Start a nNew thread

ASUS P5PE-VM
by Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello 19 Nov '11

19 Nov '11

ASUS P5PE-VM success report. http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Intel_Socket_775/P5PEVM/ Logs attached. Marcos

1 0

LiveCD
by Dan King 18 Nov '11

18 Nov '11

I tried to download the live cd and just wanted to let you guys know that only the MegaUpload link works all the rest have been taken down

2 1

Re: [flashrom] [patch] serprog: add proper serprog_map
by Urja Rannikko 18 Nov '11

18 Nov '11

Add serprog_map so that chips are addressed properly. I did this for adding LPC support to my ATmega644 programmer. Signed-off-by: Urja Rannikko <urjaman(a)gmail.com> ----- That previous one was clearly too verbose, noticed it when I ran this without any -V. I put those messages down one level of verbosity. -- Urja Rannikko

1 0

[patch] serprog: add proper serprog_map
by Urja Rannikko 18 Nov '11

18 Nov '11

Add serprog_map so that chips are addressed properly. I did this for adding LPC support to my ATmega644 programmer. Signed-off-by: Urja Rannikko <urjaman(a)gmail.com> ------ Sorry if I interrupted you all out of nowhere :P, I was porting LPC code somebody (Mike Stirling, had to look that up) did for the AVR to my ATmega644 (FTDI-USB) programmer, and noticed that it forced a base address of 0xFFF80000 that is right only for 512K chips. I modified the code to only add the highest 8 bits that are not addressable in serprog protocol, and added this map function to have flashrom address stuff properly. This shouldnt affect non-serprog code at all, and it shouldnt matter to parallel, nor it would affect the lpc addr or 0xFFF80000-implementation, also my SPI W25Q80 doesnt mind being addressed in this way at all (detect and read tested). Further testing is recommended. Also sidenote: it might be useful to add an optional write_jedec_1-implementation into serprog. This thing is taking forever to write LPC. (LPC with a 12Mhz AVR isnt that fast anyways, but with USB ping-pong on every byte written...) -- Urja Rannikko

1 0

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Svante Olofsson 18 Nov '11

18 Nov '11

Hi Joshua, Thank you very much for the help! I can now verify that the patch works, the bios is updated and the system boots ;) Best regards, --Svante

1 0

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Joshua Roys 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

On 11/17/2011 02:12 PM, Svante Olofsson wrote: > Hi Joshua, > Hello again, Sent the last email a little too quickly. Ignore the 2nd patch in that email also (if you decide to use svn). I tried to fix a non-existent bug! Thanks, Josh

2 1

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Joshua Roys 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

On 11/17/2011 02:12 PM, Svante Olofsson wrote: > Hi Joshua, > > I couldn't get the patch to compile (had also, strangely, to manually > edit one part of the patch) > Hello, Sorry- you'll need to apply that patch to the SVN version of flashrom. My patches depend on a fairly recent change. Alternatively, if you want to avoid checking out the svn copy, change: return it8712f_gpio_set(3, 1); to return it8712f_gpio_set(13, 1); Otherwise, apply these 2 patches to svn (and ignore the previous patch). Thanks, Josh

2 1

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Joshua Roys 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

On 11/17/2011 11:53 AM, Svante Olofsson wrote: > I have attached the information.... > > I guess that I haven't changed the rom at all if the protection is in > place :) The protection must be lifted programatically right? Nothing > can be done with parameters in the bios setup? > > BR, > --Svante > Please try the attached patch and reply with the output from `flashrom -Vw ...' Thanks, Josh

2 1

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Joshua Roys 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

On 11/17/2011 11:23 AM, Svante Olofsson wrote: > I tried to write the backup.rom with flashrom -V -w backup.rom and that > seemed to work even if the rom was identical to the one already present. > To me everything looks quite good and I am considering writing the new > rom that I downloaded. What do you thing? Do you still want me to post > any more information with lspci -xxnnvvv, flashrom -V and superiotool > -deV ? > Yes, please send that information. The old version of flashrom failed because of a write protection that is in place on your system. As Stefan mentioned, newer flashrom versions will not write blocks that don't need to be written. See below: > Reading old flash chip contents... done. > Erasing and writing flash chip... Trying erase function 0... > 0x000000-0x000fff:S, 0x001000-0x001fff:S, 0x002000-0x002fff:S, [...] > 0x07e000-0x07efff:S, 0x07f000-0x07ffff:S > Erase/write done. > Verifying flash... VERIFIED. > Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x6d > Restoring PCI config space for 00:01:0 reg 0x92 > The ":S" after the address ranges indicate that flashrom skipped that section. Thanks, Josh p.s. please use `lspci -vvvnnxxx' (as root) with 3 x's. Thanks.

2 1

Re: [flashrom] Asus A7NVM400 (A7NX8-VM400)
by Stefan Tauner 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:58:23 +0200 Svante Olofsson <svante(a)fyraess.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I tried to flash an A7N8X-VM400 board with the current bios (got it with > flashrom -r). The current bios rom was of identical size as the downloaded > newer bios rom. I figured it would be safest to try to flash with the old > one :) hello by "old one" you mean the backed up rom contents i guess? well in newer versions of flashrom this would lead to a complete skipped write because it checks for equal content on the chip before erasing anything ;) what is more of a problem is the *old* version of flashrom you have used, as you have seen... > > The information below is copied from the terminal: > > svante@stereo:~$ sudo flashrom -wV current_A7NVM400-ASUS.080009.rom > flashrom v0.9.1-r946 > […] > Flash image seems to be a legacy BIOS. Disabling checks. > Writing flash chip... Erasing flash chip... Looking at blockwise erase > function 0... trying... 0x000000-0x000fff, ERASE FAILED at 0x00000008! > Expected=0xff, Read=0x4c, failed byte count from 0x00000000-0x00000fff: > 0xfdc > ERASE FAILED! > > Looking at blockwise erase function 1... trying... 0x000000-0x00ffff, ERASE > FAILED at 0x00000008! Expected=0xff, Read=0x4c, failed byte count from > 0x00000000-0x0000ffff: 0xfed5 > ERASE FAILED! > > Looking at blockwise erase function 2... trying... 0x000000-0x07ffff, ERASE > FAILED at 0x00000008! Expected=0xff, Read=0x4c, failed byte count from > 0x00000000-0x0007ffff: 0x687be > ERASE FAILED! this looks like a complete write protection, which is quite common... see http://flashrom.org/Board_Enable for details. > > what do you think, am I screwed? not at all, but we will probably need to add some code to enable writing on your board. first of all please get a current version of flashrom from subversion and compile it. http://flashrom.org/Downloads then verify that the rom content is still the same as the backed up image (e.g. flashrom -v backup.rom). then reply with the logs of the following commands (run as root) attached/embedded: lspci -xxnnvvv flashrom -V if possible also superiotool -deV you can of course also try to reverse engineer the needed code yourself as described here: http://flashrom.org/Finding_Board_Enable_by_Reverse_Engineering if you wait for us to do it it can take its time... -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

flashrom