Hi,
I've got a Bay Trail tablet[1] and I tested flashrom on it, see the attached report.
As reported in [1] I compiled flashrom statically on my host and then executed it under Android on the target.
Reading the SPI flash works fine, is it safe enough to test writing too?
I ask because accessing the SPI flash physically for external programming can be a little more inconvenient for a tablet.
Another question: would it be possible to use flashrom to only reset the firmware _settings_, while leaving the code untouched?
Thanks, Antonio
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:49:24 +0100 Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it wrote:
Hi,
I've got a Bay Trail tablet[1] and I tested flashrom on it, see the attached report.
As reported in [1] I compiled flashrom statically on my host and then executed it under Android on the target.
Reading the SPI flash works fine, is it safe enough to test writing too?
Erasing and write works fine too, logs attached. And for the records the file produced with the read operation is exactly the same dumped with the Intel FPT (Flash Programming Tool).
A patch which updates the test state for this device is on its way.
Thanks, Antonio
Tested on a Teclast X98 Air 3G tablet.
Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it --- chipset_enable.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/chipset_enable.c b/chipset_enable.c index dd4e0ea..abab086 100644 --- a/chipset_enable.c +++ b/chipset_enable.c @@ -1593,7 +1593,7 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = { {0x1166, 0x0205, OK, "Broadcom", "HT-1000", enable_flash_ht1000}, {0x17f3, 0x6030, OK, "RDC", "R8610/R3210", enable_flash_rdc_r8610}, {0x8086, 0x0c60, NT, "Intel", "S12x0", enable_flash_s12x0}, - {0x8086, 0x0f1c, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, + {0x8086, 0x0f1c, OK, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1d, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1e, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1f, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont},
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:56:12 +0100 Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it wrote:
Tested on a Teclast X98 Air 3G tablet.
Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it
chipset_enable.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/chipset_enable.c b/chipset_enable.c index dd4e0ea..abab086 100644 --- a/chipset_enable.c +++ b/chipset_enable.c @@ -1593,7 +1593,7 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = { {0x1166, 0x0205, OK, "Broadcom", "HT-1000", enable_flash_ht1000}, {0x17f3, 0x6030, OK, "RDC", "R8610/R3210", enable_flash_rdc_r8610}, {0x8086, 0x0c60, NT, "Intel", "S12x0", enable_flash_s12x0},
- {0x8086, 0x0f1c, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont},
- {0x8086, 0x0f1c, OK, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1d, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1e, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont}, {0x8086, 0x0f1f, NT, "Intel", "Bay Trail", enable_flash_silvermont},
I have done this in my tested stuff branch, committed in r1879. Thanks Antonio!
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:53:34 +0100 Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:49:24 +0100 Antonio Ospite ao2@ao2.it wrote:
Hi,
I've got a Bay Trail tablet[1] and I tested flashrom on it, see the attached report.
As reported in [1] I compiled flashrom statically on my host and then executed it under Android on the target.
Reading the SPI flash works fine, is it safe enough to test writing too?
Erasing and write works fine too, logs attached. And for the records the file produced with the read operation is exactly the same dumped with the Intel FPT (Flash Programming Tool).
Thank you for testing. So this seems to be the first tablet to be officially supported by flashrom :) I have added it to the list of supported *mobile devices* (I have changed the wording from laptops because of this device...).
-
Antonio Ospite -
Stefan Tauner