Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] Fix erase-blocks specification for the Atmel AT49F002(N)(T)

[Stefan Reinauer]

On 1/23/10 6:59 PM, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> Oh, one question -- is the order of erase-blocks as specified in
> flashchips.c relevant? AT49F002(N) and AT49F002(N)T have different
> orders right now.

The T variant is usually "top bootblock" while the other one has the
bootblock in the bottom.

This makes the T variants a good fit for x86 systems and the non-T
variants for everything else

Stefan