On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:13:50 +0200 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Am 20.08.2011 12:39 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at
Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net with comments.
ichspi.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ichspi.c b/ichspi.c index 61c0825..c38fbfc 100644 --- a/ichspi.c +++ b/ichspi.c @@ -73,10 +73,8 @@ #define ICH9_REG_FREG0 0x54 /* 32 Bytes Flash Region 0 */
#define ICH9_REG_PR0 0x74 /* 32 Bytes Protected Range 0 */ -#define ICH9_REG_PR1 0x78 /* 32 Bytes Protected Range 1 */ -#define ICH9_REG_PR2 0x7c /* 32 Bytes Protected Range 2 */ -#define ICH9_REG_PR3 0x80 /* 32 Bytes Protected Range 3 */ -#define ICH9_REG_PR4 0x84 /* 32 Bytes Protected Range 4 */ +#define PR_WP_OFF 31 /* 31: write protection enable */ +#define PR_RP_OFF 15 /* 15: read protection enable */
#define ICH9_REG_SSFS 0x90 /* 08 Bits */ #define SSFS_SCIP_OFF 0 /* SPI Cycle In Progress */ @@ -1482,6 +1480,33 @@ static void do_ich9_spi_frap(uint32_t frap, int i)
}
- /* In contrast to FRAP and the master section of the descriptor the bits
* in the PR registers have an inverted meaning. The bits in FRAP* indicate read and write access _grant_. Here they indicate read* and write _protection_ respectively. If both bits are 0 the address* bits are ignored.*/+#define ICH_PR_PERMS(pr) (((~((pr) >> PR_RP_OFF) & 1) << 0) | \
((~((pr) >> PR_WP_OFF) & 1) << 1))+static void prettyprint_ich9_reg_pr(int i) +{
- static const char *const access_names[4] = {
"locked", "read-only", "write-only", "read-write"- };
- uint8_t off = ICH9_REG_PR0 + (i * 4);
- uint32_t pr = mmio_readl(ich_spibar + off);
- int rwperms = ICH_PR_PERMS(pr);
- msg_pdbg("0x%02X: 0x%08x (PR%u", off, pr, i);
- if (rwperms != 0x3)
msg_pdbg(")\n0x%08x-0x%08x is %s\n", (ICH_FREG_BASE(pr) << 12),(ICH_FREG_LIMIT(pr) << 12) | 0x0fff,access_names[rwperms]);- else
msg_pdbg(", unused)\n");dbg2 IMHO. And why do you need two lines of output per PR register?
dbg2 now.
to match the output of the FREG registers: 0x54: 0x00000000 (FREG0: Flash Descriptor) 0x00000000-0x00000fff is read-only 0x58: 0x07ff0500 (FREG1: BIOS) 0x00500000-0x007fffff is read-write 0x5C: 0x04ff0003 (FREG2: Management Engine) 0x00003000-0x004fffff is locked 0x60: 0x00020001 (FREG3: Gigabit Ethernet) 0x00001000-0x00002fff is read-write 0x64: 0x00000fff (FREG4: Platform Data) Platform Data region is unused. 0x74: 0x9fff07d0 (PR0) 0x007d0000-0x01ffffff is read-only 0x78: 0x00000000 (PR1, unused) 0x7C: 0x00000000 (PR2, unused) 0x80: 0x00000000 (PR3, unused) 0x84: 0x00000000 (PR4, unused)
as you can see i even save one uninteresting line for each unused protection just for you! ;)
+}
static const struct spi_programmer spi_programmer_ich7 = { .type = SPI_CONTROLLER_ICH7, .max_data_read = 64, @@ -1623,16 +1648,8 @@ int ich_init_spi(struct pci_dev *dev, uint32_t base, void *rcrb, for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) do_ich9_spi_frap(tmp, i);
msg_pdbg("0x74: 0x%08x (PR0)\n",mmio_readl(ich_spibar + ICH9_REG_PR0));msg_pdbg("0x78: 0x%08x (PR1)\n",mmio_readl(ich_spibar + ICH9_REG_PR1));msg_pdbg("0x7C: 0x%08x (PR2)\n",mmio_readl(ich_spibar + ICH9_REG_PR2));msg_pdbg("0x80: 0x%08x (PR3)\n",mmio_readl(ich_spibar + ICH9_REG_PR3));msg_pdbg("0x84: 0x%08x (PR4)\n",mmio_readl(ich_spibar + ICH9_REG_PR4));
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++)prettyprint_ich9_reg_pr(i);IIRC some chipset generations only support PR0-PR3. Besides that, it would be nice to have those prettyprinters for ICH7 as well if possible/applicable.
lets see. ich7 has 3 of them starting at 60h ich8 has 5 of them starting at 74h ich9 has 5 of them starting at 74h ich10 has 5 of them starting at 74h
that would be easy... BUT ich7's PR are very different: - they only have a write protection bit, not read protection - the address ranges are encoded in different bits of the registers. - ich8+ support 2 flash chips hence need 25 bits for addresses...
so yes it would be nice, but requires more work which i wont do right now. committed with the verbosity change only in r1446