[coreboot] r3300 - trunk/util/flashrom
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Wed May 14 00:14:04 CEST 2008
On 14.05.2008 00:08, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>> On 13.05.2008 23:53, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
>>> * svn at coreboot.org <svn at coreboot.org> [080512 23:19]:
>>>> Author: hailfinger
>>>> Date: 2008-05-12 23:19:53 +0200 (Mon, 12 May 2008)
>>>> New Revision: 3300
>>>> Modified: trunk/util/flashrom/flash.h
>>>> --- trunk/util/flashrom/flash.h 2008-05-12 14:25:31 UTC (rev 3299)
>>>> +++ trunk/util/flashrom/flash.h 2008-05-12 21:19:53 UTC (rev 3300)
>>>> @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@
>>>> #define TEST_OK_READ (1<<1)
>>>> #define TEST_OK_ERASE (1<<2)
>>>> #define TEST_OK_WRITE (1<<3)
>>>> +#define TEST_OK_PREW
>>> Can we call this TEST_OK_ALL or something? PREW is not exactly
>> ProbeReadEraseWrite is the best I could come up with. Once we support
>> sector-based unlocking and sector-based erasing, we might add
>> TEST_OK_UNLOCK and TEST_OK_SECTOR_ERASE. Having TEST_OK_ALL as alias
>> would mean we assume any new functionality is supported on all chips.
>> That would defeat the purpose of such support statements.
> Then let's not use PREW. Or we will have to end up providing all
> different kinds of combinations.
The only combinations I can think of are P, PR, PREW. It is very
unlikely that someone will test erase and write without testing read and
probe. It's also unlikely someone will test erase without write.
More information about the coreboot