Looks good to me. Is there any reason not to ACK this? It seems like a useful optimization, at least.
This patch is 5 months old and it would be awesome if someone could
review it.
We need this if we ever want to support partial writes.
On 22.12.2009 02:38, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> On 23.11.2009 15:33, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>
>> On 19.11.2009 17:51, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>>
>>
>>> To summarize: Write granularity is chip specific. The following write
>>> granularities exist according to my datasheet survey:
>>> - 1 bit. Each bit can be cleared individually.
>>> - 1 byte. A byte can be written once. Further writes to an already
>>> written byte cause the contents to be either undefined or to stay unchanged.
>>> - 128 bytes. If less than 128 bytes are written, the rest will be
>>> erased. Each write to a 128-byte region will trigger an automatic erase
>>> before anything is written. Very uncommon behaviour.
>>> - 256 bytes. If less than 256 bytes are written, the contents of the
>>> unwritten bytes are undefined.
>>>
>>>
>> New patch. Handle 1-bit, 1-byte and 256-byte write granularity.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>Developer quote of the year:
>>
>>
>
> Ping?
> This is http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/582/ in case you want to
> look at the patch again.
>
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
"We are juggling too many chainsaws and flaming arrows and tigers."
_______________________________________________
flashrom mailing list
flashrom@flashrom.org
http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom