New motherboard

[Dima Veselov]

Hello,

I have an Asus Barebone system, called Asus Vintage 2 PH1. SVN-trunk
flashrom version won't flash it initially, but I found a way to do it.

Few words about it:
Barebone has its own story, own BIOSes to download, but it looks in
strange way: some soft think its Asus P5KPML motherboard, BIOS
says its P5LD2-VM, flashrom show P5LD2-MQ. Motherboard tag says
"DP_MB/V2-PH1<GA>"

Anyway, it has same problem as P5LD2, but a bit different hardware.

So I added motherboard to a copy of trunk version and flashed it 
successfully.

I attach diff file and put log files to download:
http://kab00m.ru/temp/flashrom.txz

Hope this will help.

[Stefan Tauner]

On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 01:13:32 +0400
Dima Veselov  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have an Asus Barebone system, called Asus Vintage 2 PH1. SVN-trunk
> flashrom version won't flash it initially, but I found a way to do it.
>
> Few words about it:
> Barebone has its own story, own BIOSes to download, but it looks in
> strange way: some soft think its Asus P5KPML motherboard, BIOS
> says its P5LD2-VM, flashrom show P5LD2-MQ. Motherboard tag says
> "DP_MB/V2-PH1<GA>"
>
> Anyway, it has same problem as P5LD2, but a bit different hardware.
>
> So I added motherboard to a copy of trunk version and flashed it 
> successfully.
>
> I attach diff file and put log files to download:
> http://kab00m.ru/temp/flashrom.txz
>
> Hope this will help.

Hello Dima,

thanks for your patch! You wrote that you have successfully flashed
your board after applying the changes in your patch, but there is no
log file showing that. Also, both entries (in print.c and
board_enable.c) mark the board with "NT" (i.e. not tested). I wonder
why you did not mark them with "OK"?

We would also like to acknowledge your authorship by adding your
signed-off-by line (and even require that for more complex patches).
See http://flashrom.org/Developer_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure for
details. In simple cases like this that do not reach the threshold of
originality I could commit it without it, but I'd appreciate it if you
would resend the patch possibly with the status fields changed and a
proper signed-off-by line if you wish.

[Dima Veselov]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:06:18AM +0200, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> > I have an Asus Barebone system, called Asus Vintage 2 PH1. SVN-trunk
> > flashrom version won't flash it initially, but I found a way to do it.
> >
> > Few words about it:
> > Barebone has its own story, own BIOSes to download, but it looks in
> > strange way: some soft think its Asus P5KPML motherboard, BIOS
> > says its P5LD2-VM, flashrom show P5LD2-MQ. Motherboard tag says
> > "DP_MB/V2-PH1<GA>"
> >
> > Anyway, it has same problem as P5LD2, but a bit different hardware.
> >
> > So I added motherboard to a copy of trunk version and flashed it 
> > successfully.
> >
> > I attach diff file and put log files to download:
> > http://kab00m.ru/temp/flashrom.txz
> >
> > Hope this will help.
>
> Hello Dima,
>
> thanks for your patch! You wrote that you have successfully flashed
> your board after applying the changes in your patch, but there is no
> log file showing that.

I used Vintage to flash MSI chip replacing it on the fly. All the
utilities failed to work, I had to boot machine many times, each time
replacing chips. So, when it finally happened - I was too happy to 
record log-file :) Just beleive me :)
> Also, both entries (in print.c and
> board_enable.c) mark the board with "NT" (i.e. not tested). I wonder
> why you did not mark them with "OK"?

I am not a code guru, so I just copy/pasted P5LD2 strings as the most
close one, honestly I was sure it IS P5LD2, but noticed 27b8/27b0
difference later. Sending patch I wasn't sure my only word will
state this enough to approve motherboard for entire project :)
> We would also like to acknowledge your authorship by adding your
> signed-off-by line (and even require that for more complex patches).
> See http://flashrom.org/Developer_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure for
> details. In simple cases like this that do not reach the threshold of
> originality I could commit it without it, but I'd appreciate it if you
> would resend the patch possibly with the status fields changed and a
> proper signed-off-by line if you wish.

See attachment. Don't have git, but patch works :)

[Stefan Tauner]

On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 05:51:50 +0400
Dima Veselov  wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:06:18AM +0200, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> > Hello Dima,
> >
> > thanks for your patch! You wrote that you have successfully flashed
> > your board after applying the changes in your patch, but there is no
> > log file showing that.
>
> I used Vintage to flash MSI chip replacing it on the fly. All the
> utilities failed to work, I had to boot machine many times, each time
> replacing chips. So, when it finally happened - I was too happy to 
> record log-file :) Just beleive me :)

No problem, I just wanted to make sure I have understood you correctly.
> > Also, both entries (in print.c and
> > board_enable.c) mark the board with "NT" (i.e. not tested). I wonder
> > why you did not mark them with "OK"?
>
> I am not a code guru, so I just copy/pasted P5LD2 strings as the most
> close one, honestly I was sure it IS P5LD2, but noticed 27b8/27b0
> difference later. Sending patch I wasn't sure my only word will
> state this enough to approve motherboard for entire project :)
> > We would also like to acknowledge your authorship by adding your
> > signed-off-by line (and even require that for more complex patches).
> > See http://flashrom.org/Developer_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure for
> > details. In simple cases like this that do not reach the threshold of
> > originality I could commit it without it, but I'd appreciate it if you
> > would resend the patch possibly with the status fields changed and a
> > proper signed-off-by line if you wish.
>
> See attachment. Don't have git, but patch works :)

Thank you very much for all the clarifications and the updated patch.
I have slightly refined it and committed it in r1828.