Hi,
Seems fine (i built it etc) except for one tiny nitpick noticed by git (or i think a default commit hook, but whatever) below.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 2:57 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Atapromise chip size limiting has two bugs I didn't catch during review, but only in the moment of commit.
The current code is checking model_id to remember if a chip has already been limited, but if flashchips.c contains two subsequent chips with different vendor_id but identical model_id the adjustment will not be done. Switch to checking the chip size instead.
If a chip has multiple whole-chip erase functions, only one will be modified. Fix that.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net
Index: flashrom-atapromise_fix_limit_chip/atapromise.c
--- flashrom-atapromise_fix_limit_chip/atapromise.c (Revision 1916) +++ flashrom-atapromise_fix_limit_chip/atapromise.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -79,38 +79,35 @@
static void atapromise_limit_chip(struct flashchip *chip) {
static uint32_t last_model_id = 0; unsigned int i, size;
unsigned int usable_erasers = 0;
if (chip->model_id == last_model_id)
return;
size = chip->total_size * 1024;
if (size > rom_size) {
/* Undefine all block_erasers that don't operate on the whole chip,
* and adjust the eraseblock size of the one that does.
*/
for (i = 0; i < NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS; ++i) {
if (chip->block_erasers[i].eraseblocks[0].size != size) {
chip->block_erasers[i].eraseblocks[0].count = 0;
chip->block_erasers[i].block_erase = NULL;
} else {
chip->block_erasers[i].eraseblocks[0].size = rom_size;
break;
}
}
if (i != NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS) {
chip->total_size = rom_size / 1024;
if (chip->page_size > rom_size)
chip->page_size = rom_size;
/* Chip is small enough or already limited. */
if (size <= rom_size)
return;
^ That line has a mix of spaces (first) and a tab... rest of the function seems to be tabs, so fix with spaces=>tab seems appropriate.
So with that fixed, this is: Acked-by: Urja Rannikko urjaman@gmail.com