Hi all,
did I miss your answer or didn't you write one yet?
Regards, Helge
-----Original Message----- From: flashrom-bounces@flashrom.org [mailto:flashrom-bounces@flashrom.org] On Behalf Of Wagner, Helge (GE Germany) Sent: Dienstag, 19. Juli 2011 10:57 To: Stefan Reinauer; Carl-Daniel Hailfinger Cc: flashrom@flashrom.org Subject: Re: [flashrom] Macronix MX25L6445E
Stefan,
Did you use my latest patch (at http://www.flashrom.org/pipermail/flashrom/2011-June/007013.html )?
Carl-Daniel,
To be sure that the spi_block_erase_20 works for both the MX25L6405
and the MX25L6445E, we could change the block erase size from 64K to 4K. This should work even for the MX25L6405, but with the side effect of the erase taking longer than needed.
This was the comment for my first try.
Sorry, but AFAICS this will cause chip corruption. To be exact, specifying a too small eraseblock size (4 kB instead of 64 kB) means that flashrom will walk the device in 4 kB blocks, erase each block and write to it. Now if the actual erase block size is bigger than the
specified block size, you'll get this:
And exactly because of that I have reworked the patch (see above).
Regards, Helge
-----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer [mailto:stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org] Sent: Montag, 18. Juli 2011 23:49 To: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger Cc: Wagner, Helge (GE Germany); flashrom@flashrom.org Subject: Re: [flashrom] Macronix MX25L6445E
* Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [110718 23:44]:
Am 18.07.2011 19:07 schrieb Stefan Reinauer:
- Wagner, Helge (GE Intelligent Platforms) Helge.Wagner@ge.com
[110527 15:46]:
To be sure that the spi_block_erase_20 works for both the MX25L6405
and the MX25L6445E, we could change the block erase size from 64K to 4K. This should work even for the MX25L6405, but with the side effect of the erase taking longer than needed.
Any comments?
works great for me!
Please find my patches included.
Signed-off-by: Helge Wagner helge.wagner@ge.com
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org
Sorry, but AFAICS this will cause chip corruption. To be exact, specifying a too small eraseblock size (4 kB instead of 64 kB) means that flashrom will walk the device in 4 kB blocks, erase each block and write to it. Now if the actual erase block size is bigger than the
specified block size, you'll get this:
Yes, I agree that changing the block erase size is risky. Good thing the patch does not change it, so it should be save to apply, plus it solves the problem.
Stefan
_______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list flashrom@flashrom.org http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom