Am 16.08.2014 01:43 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 01:09:44 +0200 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
-#if CONFIG_INTERNAL == 1
- if (programmer_table[programmer].map_flash_region == physmap)
snprintf(location, sizeof(location), "at physical address 0x%lx", base);- else
-#endif
snprintf(location, sizeof(location), "on %s", programmer_table[programmer].name);That info should not have disappeared, and we may soon have to extend it for funny constellations like two chips in a programmer (EC flash and chipset flash for laptops).
If this is an important detail we want to tell the user then we need to define a proper interface... there is no reason at all to know the base address in the probing function and that's why I have removed that bit completely, and because I don't see how this is important at all at the msg_pinfo level(!).
What about dual flash chip setups in the FWH/LPC case? There we have multiple flash chips at different addresses, e.g. a 2 MByte chip at 4G-4M and a 2 MByte chip at 4G-2M. Yes, such hardware exists. It's the reason we have the feature to optionally set FWH IDSEL on ICH for misconfigured boards of that type. Admittedly the LPC case is a bit less weird and works by strapping LPC chips to the correct address.
I would be ok with printing the programmer (well, the master would be better if that's already possible... do they have names already? :) ... but the base address printing needs to die or be moved elsewhere.
Indeed, we should print the master name, not the programmer name. I thought I had a patch doing that, but digging through my archive it seems I can't find that patch anymore and/or it was a figment of my imagination.
Regards, Carl-Daniel