[PATCH] support for MX251635E

[Stephan GUILLOUX]

Hello,

Below, a patch to allow MX25L1635E support, as discussed with Carldani.
It is also available in attachment.

This one is working fine on our system, with flashrom 0.9.2

Sorry for the patch, but I do not have svn anymore.
I had to use a standard diff -c.

Make good use of it;-)

Stephan.

Signed-off-by: Stephan Guilloux
--- ./flashrom-0.9.2.org/flashchips.h	2010-04-20 21:34:31.000000000 +0200
+++ ./flashrom-0.9.2.new/flashchips.h	2010-09-03 09:37:39.386013000 +0200
@@ -284,7 +284,8 @@
  #define MX_25L6405		0x2017	/* MX25L3205{,D} */
  #define MX_25L12805		0x2018	/* MX25L12805 */
  #define MX_25L1635D		0x2415
+#define MX_25L1635E		0x2515	/* MX25L1635{E} */
  #define MX_25L3235D		0x5E16	/* MX25L3225D/MX25L3235D/MX25L3237D */
  #define MX_29F001B		0x19
  #define MX_29F001T		0x18
--- ./flashrom-0.9.2.org/flashchips.c	2010-04-20 21:34:31.000000000 +0200
+++ ./flashrom-0.9.2.new/flashchips.c	2010-09-03 09:38:44.637466000 +0200
@@ -2775,6 +2775,37 @@

{
    	.vendor		= "Macronix",
+		.name		= "MX25L1635E",
+		.bustype	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
+		.manufacture_id	= MX_ID,
+		.model_id	= MX_25L1635E,
+		.total_size	= 2048,
+		.page_size	= 256,
+		.tested		= TEST_UNTESTED,
+		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
+		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
+		.block_erasers	=
+		{
+			{
+				.eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 512} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 32} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { {2 * 1024 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_60,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { {2 * 1024 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
+			}
+		},
+		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
+		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+	},
+
+	{
+		.vendor		= "Macronix",
    	.name		= "MX25L3205",
    	.bustype	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
    	.manufacture_id	= MX_ID,

[David Borg]

Updated against revision 1159.

David

On 9 September 2010 21:39, Stephan GUILLOUX  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Below, a patch to allow MX25L1635E support, as discussed with Carldani.
> It is also available in attachment.
>
> This one is working fine on our system, with flashrom 0.9.2
>
> Sorry for the patch, but I do not have svn anymore.
> I had to use a standard diff -c.
>
> Make good use of it;-)
>
> Stephan.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephan Guilloux
> --- ./flashrom-0.9.2.org/flashchips.h   2010-04-20 21:34:31.000000000 +0200
> +++ ./flashrom-0.9.2.new/flashchips.h   2010-09-03 09:37:39.386013000 +0200
> @@ -284,7 +284,8 @@
>  #define MX_25L6405             0x2017  /* MX25L3205{,D} */
>  #define MX_25L12805            0x2018  /* MX25L12805 */
>  #define MX_25L1635D            0x2415
> +#define MX_25L1635E            0x2515  /* MX25L1635{E} */
>  #define MX_25L3235D            0x5E16  /* MX25L3225D/MX25L3235D/MX25L3237D
> */
>  #define MX_29F001B             0x19
>  #define MX_29F001T             0x18
> --- ./flashrom-0.9.2.org/flashchips.c   2010-04-20 21:34:31.000000000 +0200
> +++ ./flashrom-0.9.2.new/flashchips.c   2010-09-03 09:38:44.637466000 +0200
> @@ -2775,6 +2775,37 @@
>
> {
>                .vendor         = "Macronix",
> .name           = "MX25L1635E",
> .bustype        = CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
> .manufacture_id = MX_ID,
> .model_id       = MX_25L1635E,
> .total_size     = 2048,
> .page_size      = 256,
> .tested         = TEST_UNTESTED,
> .probe          = probe_spi_rdid,
> .probe_timing   = TIMING_ZERO,
> .block_erasers  =
> {
> {
> .eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 512} },
> .block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
> }, {
> .eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 32} },
> .block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
> }, {
> .eraseblocks = { {2 * 1024 * 1024, 1} },
> .block_erase = spi_block_erase_60,
> }, {
> .eraseblocks = { {2 * 1024 * 1024, 1} },
> .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
> }
> },
> .write          = spi_chip_write_256,
> .read           = spi_chip_read,
> },
> {
> .vendor         = "Macronix",
>
> .name           = "MX25L3205",
>                .bustype        = CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
>                .manufacture_id = MX_ID,
>
> flashrom mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom

[Paul Menzel]

Am Montag, den 13.09.2010, 17:03 +0200 schrieb David Borg:
> Updated against revision 1159.

Both times a Signed-off-by line is missing [1] as far as I can see.

[…]

Thanks,

Paul

[1] http://flashrom.org/Development_Guidelines

[Uwe Hermann]

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 08:31:48PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Montag, den 13.09.2010, 17:03 +0200 schrieb David Borg:
> > Updated against revision 1159.

Thanks for the patch and for updating it.

Committed in r1162 with two changes: I added the following lines as per
datasheet:

+               .feature_bits   = FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
+               .unlock         = spi_disable_blockprotect,

Please let us know if the current svn version works for you
on hardware, if possible send "./flashrom -V -w foo.bin" output, thanks.
We can then mark the chip as tested.
> Both times a Signed-off-by line is missing [1] as far as I can see.

The original patch has a Signed-off-by, it's just a bit hidden.

Uwe.