[coreboot] r3356 - trunk/util/flashrom

[Mart Raudsepp]

> Please revert and add a TEST_OK_PR definition. Only PR had been tested
> for that chip.

In that case I will heavily disagree with this convention of shortening
that wasn't documented in the header (after understanding PR actually
means probe/read based on our IRC discussion). TEST_OK_PR is very close to
TEST_OK_PREW, and it's hard to see what has what when just looking at the
struct itself in the code. Also high changes of real typoes, especially
after there is precedence of a TEST_OK_PRW for instance, with the reporter
reporting probe, read and write to work fine, and not getting back about
erase. Still better than UNTESTED but very easy to mistake or typo to
PREW.

Meanwhile, added the TEST_OK_PR to the header for now to not claim false
things AND be buildable, as requested.


Thanks,
Mart Raudsepp