On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 08:40:08 +0100 Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at wrote:
Similarly to the previous patch this one updates the chips identified as above with references to and data about their respective twins. Unlike previously this one deals with the more evil details.
Helge Wagner from GE discovered some problems with chips sharing IDs and proposed a patch to tackle (some of) them, see: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/3709/ That patch was bitrotting in our mailboxes for a long time and it is still not ready for merge, but we increasingly get reports about problems (e.g. http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1525) regarding these chips and hence must act to ensure users' safety.
This patch splits the chip definitions of evil twins into separate ones which correctly declare the respective attributes (the main problems are the erase block sizes for the 0x20 opcode and hence my changes combine different chips with partly different attributes apart from their names as long as the erasers layout it the same). This forces the user to select the (right) chip definition with the -c/--chip parameter and hence will break a number of previously perfectly working environments.
0x2015 is used by and split to
- MX25L1605 (64kB sectors in 0x20 erases)
- MX25L1605A (4kB in 0x20 erases and an additional 0x52 opcode with 64kB blocks)
- MX25L1605D/MX25L1608D (4k sectors in 0x20 erases)
0x2016 is used by and split to
- MX25L3205, MX25L3205A (64kB 0x20)
- MX25L3205D/MX25L3208D (4kB 0x20)
- MX25L3206E (4k 0x20, 64k 0x52)
0x2017 is used by and split to
- MX25L6405 MX25L6405D (64k 0x20)
- MX25L6406E/MX25L6436E (4k 0x20)
- MX25L6445E (4k 0x20, 64k 0x52)
Bonus: add some minor details to MX25L1635D, MX25L1635E, MX25L3235D, MX25L12805D.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at
self-acked and committed in r1657.