flashrom

flashrom@flashrom.org

6 participants
9162 discussions

[PATCH] spi25: get rid of unneccessary line breaks (on failed probes)
by Stefan Tauner 22 Aug '11

22 Aug '11

--- not sure if this is correct for all execution paths, but it fixes the output of a probe on my thinkpad. i have looked a bit around to find examples of code that this patch would break and found none though. without this patch: Probing for Spansion S25FL064A, 8192 kB: probe_spi_rdid_generic: id1 0xef, id2 0x3017 Probing for SST SST25LF040A, 512 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0xab, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25LF080A, 1024 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0xab, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25VF010.REMS, 128 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0x90, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25VF016B, 2048 kB: probe_spi_rdid_generic: id1 0xef, id2 0x3017 with this patch: Probing for Spansion S25FL064A, 8192 kB: probe_spi_rdid_generic: id1 0xef, id2 0x3017 Probing for SST SST25LF040A, 512 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0xab, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25LF080A, 1024 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0xab, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25VF010.REMS, 128 kB: Invalid OPCODE 0x90, will not execute. Probing for SST SST25VF016B, 2048 kB: probe_spi_rdid_generic: id1 0xef, id2 0x3017 Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner(a)student.tuwien.ac.at> --- spi25.c | 4 ---- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/spi25.c b/spi25.c index 937ee5d..c9fe9ec 100644 --- a/spi25.c +++ b/spi25.c @@ -120,7 +120,6 @@ static int probe_spi_rdid_generic(struct flashchip *flash, int bytes) uint32_t id2; if (spi_rdid(readarr, bytes)) { - msg_cdbg("\n"); return 0; } @@ -201,7 +200,6 @@ int probe_spi_rems(struct flashchip *flash) uint32_t id1, id2; if (spi_rems(readarr)) { - msg_cdbg("\n"); return 0; } @@ -259,7 +257,6 @@ int probe_spi_res1(struct flashchip *flash) } if (spi_res(readarr, 1)) { - msg_cdbg("\n"); return 0; } @@ -283,7 +280,6 @@ int probe_spi_res2(struct flashchip *flash) uint32_t id1, id2; if (spi_res(readarr, 2)) { - msg_cdbg("\n"); return 0; } -- 1.7.1

1 0

[PATCH] dmi: add "Sealed-case PC" to the list of non-laptop chassis
by Stefan Tauner 22 Aug '11

22 Aug '11

--- not sure though if all other computers with that chassis type are "in all likelihood not a laptop". Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner(a)student.tuwien.ac.at> --- dmi.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/dmi.c b/dmi.c index 8f78376..5f64b94 100644 --- a/dmi.c +++ b/dmi.c @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static const struct { {0x0e, 1, "Sub Notebook"}, {0x11, 0, "Main Server Chassis"}, {0x17, 0, "Rack Mount Chassis"}, + {0x18, 0, "Sealed-case PC"}, /* used by Supermicro (X8SIE) */ }; #define DMI_COMMAND_LEN_MAX 260 -- 1.7.1

1 0

Re: [flashrom] flashrom accepts its command line parameters as a file name to read to
by Stefan Tauner 22 Aug '11

22 Aug '11

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:57:59 +0200 Idwer Vollering <vidwer(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/8/18 Christophe Poncy <cp(a)canaxis.org>: > > Hi, > > > > ... > > > # ./flashrom -r -L > > This shouldn't be allowed. hm. actually i think this is normal behavior (for getopt-using applications). one arbitrary example: grep [OPTIONS] [-e PATTERN | -f FILE] [FILE...] # grep -e -f cli_classic.c this uses "-f" as a search pattern to look for in cli_classic.c i do agree though, that it might be unexpected, especially for windows users. and even if it is expected behavior no one would miss it, if we prohibit it. > What about disallowing the creation of files that have a name listed > in cli_classic.c's optstring[] and/or long_options[] ? or prohibiting any option parameters to be started with "-" (this includes all the file names, but also: - chip names (not an issue so far) - mainboard names (ditto) - layout file names and region names (probably tolerable too) - programmer parameters (also not an issue i presume) -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

1 0

Re: [flashrom] Update of Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2HP motherboard firmware switch
by Stefan Tauner 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 08:40:54 -0600 Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > here's the log: > > ;root@sysresccd /root % flashrom > ;flashrom v0.9.3-r1205 on Linux 2.6.38-std230-i586 (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... OK. > ;coreboot table found at 0x6fffe000. > ;Found ITE Super I/O, ID 0x8718. > ;Found Chipset "AMD SB700/SB710/SB750", enabling flash write... OK. > ;This chipset supports the following protocols: LPC,FWH,SPI. > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller > ; > > After that, that's it.... > a verbose one (with -V or even -VVV) please i am not familiar with the it87xx code, but i would say it hangs in the while loop at the end of it8716f_spi_send_command. it would be easy to add a timeout there, but the question is why it does hang there (now). -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

2 1

Re: [flashrom] MSI H55-GD65 (MS-7637) (H55, locked ME region, FLOCKDN=0(!))
by Bernd Blaauw 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

Op 21-8-2011 3:40, Donovan Lavinder schreef: > to use Linux Live CD mentioned in flashrom download page, as FreeDOS > have managed to brick all of the firmware image I have been trying to > flash. Fed up, I went to get the live CD, it works now. I used > SystemRescueCd distro (you need to figure out how to mount the hard > drive or jump drive to be able to have flashrom to download the firmware > ROM - for example: mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/disk0 ), so far, this distro is > quite nice to have! I thought ramdisks make fine temporary storage? No need to mount harddisk then. It seems a bit strange to claim FreeDOS (or DJGPP-compiled flashrom) ruined your flash image. I guess file hashes would give a definitive answer to what's the issue. I have to admit though that sometimes that FreeDOS kernel has had some FAT-related issues, no guarantee they're all solved. goodluck with CoreBoot as well! So far the Asrock E350 board seems best to experiment with, though I'd like the fanless/passive Asus E350 board instead.

1 0

Re: [flashrom] Update of Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2HP motherboard firmware switch
by Donovan Lavinder 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

> here's the log: ;root@sysresccd /root % flashrom ;flashrom v0.9.3-r1205 on Linux 2.6.38-std230-i586 (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... OK. ;coreboot table found at 0x6fffe000. ;Found ITE Super I/O, ID 0x8718. ;Found Chipset "AMD SB700/SB710/SB750", enabling flash write... OK. ;This chipset supports the following protocols: LPC,FWH,SPI. ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ;4 byte RDID not supported on this SPI controller ; After that, that's it.... On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com>wrote: > The flashrom is the only program that froze when looking for the flash > chip. I have tried cold reboot - same thing happened. That here, was a > head-scratcher since it is not even supposed to happen. Probably it could be > because the firmware unmounted itself (shouldn't happen). The whole OS ran > fine otherwise (I could close the frozen flashrom program with ease). I am > wondering how could SuperIO refuse the handshake between the flashrom - I > left it alone for a while, no change in the behavior (as far as the verbose > terminal emulator was concerned). > > > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Stefan Tauner < > stefan.tauner(a)student.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > >> On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:27:02 -0600 >> Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > That's strange. I have tried rewriting the firmware so I COULD provide >> you >> > the text file... It froze after couple complaints of 4-byte RDID not >> found >> > (it just ignored that before), and I tried just "flashrom", same thing. >> Now >> > that's a can of worm. It was 100% successful - verified and signed. Now >> I am >> > somewhat confused. I may have to wait for a while (thankfully I still >> have a >> > Windows laptop so I could write up the report on progresses of the >> firmware >> > ROM.) >> >> the 4 byte RDID warnings should not matter. the chip you have does not >> need it. it is just printed for other chips that are probed for by >> flashrom. you can use the -c <chipname> parameter to probe for the >> correct chip only. regarding the lockup i can't say much without a log, >> but that it should not happen. :) does it reliably happen while probing >> for the same chip or is it (seemingly) random? could you also please >> define "froze" precisely? is it flashrom alone or the whole OS etc? >> >> -- >> Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner >> > > > > -- > "Mamma-mia, there's Koopa troopa in Mushroom Kingdom!" > -- "Mamma-mia, there's Koopa troopa in Mushroom Kingdom!"

1 0

Re: [flashrom] Update of Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2HP motherboard firmware switch
by Stefan Tauner 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:27:02 -0600 Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com> wrote: > That's strange. I have tried rewriting the firmware so I COULD provide you > the text file... It froze after couple complaints of 4-byte RDID not found > (it just ignored that before), and I tried just "flashrom", same thing. Now > that's a can of worm. It was 100% successful - verified and signed. Now I am > somewhat confused. I may have to wait for a while (thankfully I still have a > Windows laptop so I could write up the report on progresses of the firmware > ROM.) the 4 byte RDID warnings should not matter. the chip you have does not need it. it is just printed for other chips that are probed for by flashrom. you can use the -c <chipname> parameter to probe for the correct chip only. regarding the lockup i can't say much without a log, but that it should not happen. :) does it reliably happen while probing for the same chip or is it (seemingly) random? could you also please define "froze" precisely? is it flashrom alone or the whole OS etc? -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

2 1

Re: [flashrom] Update of Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2HP motherboard firmware switch
by Stefan Tauner 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 18:57:26 -0600 Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com> wrote: > After a day of struggling with bricked firmwares.... I finally ditched > FreeDOS. I went with SystemRescueCd distro and burnt coreboot precompiled > firmware under the folder /gigabyte_ma78gm/ and the firmware WORKED! But now > I am stuck with funny firmware quirks (Windows XP crashing when booting > halfway, almost to the point the video card driver is loaded, right after > "GIVEIO.SYS" driver is being loaded), even though it loaded Linux CD fine. I > guess I should try and ditch PS/2 mouse as it may probably be the cause of > strange behavior - I will be using USB mouse / keyboard as well. I am happy > with this firmware otherwise. And, the backup BIOS didn't even try to > intercept the Linux kernel in the firmware from loading. Thankfully. I will > eventually decide to recompile or "submit" the additional payloads such as > EFI and memtest86+ as those software will be needed in the future, after I > learn more of its capabilities. > > And, thanks for such a wonderful firmware! That thing's so fast! > congratulations :) this mail probably should have been sent to coreboot(a)coreboot.org though (too). btw could you provide a log of a successful flashrom write please? -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

2 1

Re: [flashrom] MSI H55-GD65 (MS-7637) (H55, locked ME region, FLOCKDN=0(!))
by Stefan Tauner 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 19:40:55 -0600 Donovan Lavinder <drmario2007(a)gmail.com> wrote: > You guys can also use flashrom utility to be able to write the firmware if > the utility you are using is being stubborn (happens to me too), hi donovan, we are talking about flashrom explicitly here.. because it is the mailing list of flashrom (and not coreboot). to be precise, we are talking about implementing a new feature to flashrom. this has almost nothing to do with coreboot. > […] -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

2 1

Re: [flashrom] MSI H55-GD65 (MS-7637) (H55, locked ME region, FLOCKDN=0(!))
by Stefan Tauner 21 Aug '11

21 Aug '11

On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 23:03:16 +0100 (BST) Luzipher McLeod <luziphermcleod(a)yahoo.ie> wrote: > Thanks for your mails ! Good to know that there is something going on (even though you indicate that it'll take quite some time). If I can do anything to help, just let me know. if you are good at REing you could help a lot (because i am a n00b regarding x86 asm, and therefor quite unmotivated to stare at disassembly - especially when i see how fluently others are able to read this :). > That said, it really seems to be a messed up situation. As far as I understood, there are several "units" involved in accessing the flash (or at least granting rights to access the flash). yes. the firmware for the ME, the GbE controller and the host (=BIOS/EFI) are on the same flash chip and all of them can access it via the southbridge. they do also write to it (the ME logs some stuff at least). access restrictions are enforced by the southbridge which acts as a gatekeeper. > Am I right that the major missing thing is support for the embedded controller (ME) ? exactly. usually that is the only real problem. the flash descriptor region is most often read-only, but that's not really an issue (it does not need to be updated normally). i *think* to know how the ME can be told to give us access superficially (using HECI/MEI), but i don't know the exact details. i have a patch already that implements MEI communication in flashrom... the question is just what to send (and what to expect to receive :) > I also do have a flashing utility that works from DOS if that'd be any help (reverse engineering) ? there are various of those and RE is the way to go probably (because intel won't tell us probably). having access to the binary is not the problem though. > > PS: Wir können auch deutsch schreiben, ich hab's mal in Englisch verfasst, weil du erwähnt hast, das das ganze evtl auch der Dokumentation für etwaige Nachfolgerwahnsinnige dient :-) if it is not too hard for you, english is the way to go because it is the least common denominator of those involved. i think i should write together what i know about unlocking the ME. probably a wiki page would be best... -- 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