Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] Add eraseblock functions to self-check

[Sean Nelson]

On 1/18/10 6:46 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Add eraseblock functions to self-check. It doesn't make sense to have
> different layouts for the same function on one chip.
> Keep going if an error is found, we want all errors to be reported in
> one fell swoop.
>
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> Index: flashrom-selfcheck_eraseblocks_functions/flashrom.c
>
> --- flashrom-selfcheck_eraseblocks_functions/flashrom.c	(Revision 866)
> +++ flashrom-selfcheck_eraseblocks_functions/flashrom.c	(Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -833,10 +833,13 @@
>    return 0;
>   }
>
> -/* This function shares a lot of its structure with erase_flash(). */
> +/* This function shares a lot of its structure with erase_flash().
> Even if an error is found, the function will keep going and check the rest.
> */
> int selfcheck_eraseblocks(struct flashchip *flash)
> {
> int i, k;
>
> int i, j, k;
>
> int ret = 0;
>
> for (k = 0; k<  NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS; k++) {
> unsigned int done = 0;
>
> @@ -850,8 +853,7 @@
>    				"%i region %i has size 0. Please report"
>    				" a bug at [e-mail]\n",
>    				flash->name, k, i);
> 		return 1;
> 		break;
> 		ret = 1;
> }
> /* Blocks with zero count are bugs in flashchips.c. */
> if (!eraser.eraseblocks[i].count&&
>
> @@ -860,13 +862,15 @@
>    				"%i region %i has count 0. Please report"
>    				" a bug at [e-mail]\n",
>    				flash->name, k, i);
> 		return 1;
> 		break;
> 		ret = 1;
> }
> done += eraser.eraseblocks[i].count *
> 	eraser.eraseblocks[i].size;
> }
> /* This erase function is completely empty. */
> /* Empty eraseblock definition with erase function.  */
> if (!done&&  eraser.block_erase)
> 	msg_pspew("Strange: Empty eraseblock definition with "
> 		"non-empty erase function. Not an error.\n");
> if (!done)
> 	continue;
> if (done != flash->total_size * 1024) {
>
> @@ -875,10 +879,25 @@
>    			" expected 0x%06x bytes. Please report a bug at"
>    			" [e-mail]\n", flash->name, k,
>    			done, flash->total_size * 1024);
> 	return 1;
> 	ret = 1;
> }
> if (!eraser.block_erase)
> 	continue;
> /* Check if there are identical erase functions for different
>  * layouts. That would imply "magic" erase functions. The
>  * easiest way to check this is with function pointers.
>  */
> for (j = k + 1; j<  NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS; j++)
> 	if (eraser.block_erase ==
> 	    flash->block_erasers[j].block_erase) {
> 		msg_gerr("ERROR: Flash chip %s erase function "
> 			"%i and %i are identical. Please report"
> 			" a bug at [e-mail]\n",
> 			flash->name, k, j);
> 		ret = 1;
> 	}
> }
> return 0;
>
> return ret;
> }
>
> int erase_flash(struct flashchip *flash)

Acked-by: Sean Nelson