D&#39;oh! I just realized that this patch doesn&#39;t affect the x16. I really ought to read the patch more carefully...<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:50 PM, David Hendricks <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:dhendrix@google.com" target="_blank">dhendrix@google.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>


<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Sean Nelson <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:audiohacked@gmail.com" target="_blank">audiohacked@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>


<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Fix erase blocks for Winbond W25X* SPI chips. The Winbond W25X10 and related chips only have 4k and 64k blocks and only accept erase commands: 20h, d8h, and c7h.<br>
<br>
Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson &lt;<a href="mailto:audiohacked@gmail.com" target="_blank">audiohacked@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div>Tested on a W25x16 flash chip using an NM10 southbridge. Verbose flashrom -E log attached. Following an erase with a read, the image produced turns up all 0xFF bytes. The warnings reported seem benign, and probably have more to do with the NM10 than the flash chip...<div>



<br></div><div>Acked by: David Hendricks &lt;<a href="mailto:dhendrix@google.com" target="_blank">dhendrix@google.com</a>&gt;</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br>David Hendricks (dhendrix)<br>Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.<br>



</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>David Hendricks (dhendrix)<br>Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.<br>