[flashrom] Support of COM/LPT bit-bang SPI programmers in flashrom
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Wed Jun 30 10:09:07 CEST 2010
On 29.06.2010 20:13, Andrew wrote:
> 29.06.2010 20:18, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger пишет:
>> would it be OK with you if I move this discussion to the flashrom
>> mailing list?
>>
> Yes, it'll be good.
Thanks.
>> On 29.06.2010 19:11, Andrew wrote:
>>> Is it possible to add support of some low-cost serial (for ex.,
>>> SI-Prog)
>>> and parallel (for ex., Altera Byteblaster) SPI programming/interfacing
>>>
>> Yes. I have code for SPI bitbanging on the parallel port, but nobody has
>> time to test.
>>
> I can test it in near future - I have some SPI flashes, and I have
> 'universal' programmer (bunch of wires with protection resistors, 3.3V
> power stabilizer and separate pins to connect to LPT holes - I use it
> with SPIPGM; I assembled it when I need to program one SPI flash from MB)
Oh, nice. I will update the SPIPGM support patch for flashrom and it
would be great if you could test it.
>>> devices? It'll be very useful (due to it's very simple schematic), and
>>> IMHO it won't be much work to add them...
>>>
>> Sure. If someone sends me those devices, I can implement support for
>> them. Or someone else uses my RayeR SPIPGM patch for flashrom and
>> extends/changes it so it works with the Altera Byteblaster.
>>
> SPIPGM differs from ByteBlaster only by some LPT pins. + buffer.
> Pinout for ByteBlasterMV:
> JTAG (SPI) pins:
> D0 -> TCK (SCK)
> D1 -> TMS (CS-? or NC)
> D6 -> TDI (SI)
> Busy -> TDO (SO)
>
> Programmer pins (hardware detection):
> D5 -> nACK
> D7 -> PE (PaperEnd) via buffer (checking if buffer powered and
> working)
> nAutoFd -> buffer on (active in low)
> nError -> pull-up to Vcc
This can be supported easily by duplicating my SPIPGM driver.
> For SI-Prog connection is also very simple:
> SPI pins:
> DSR -> SCK
> DTR -> SI
> CTS -> SO
>
> Programmer pins (hardware detection):
> DSR -> RTS
How does the SI-Prog handle CS?
> About programmer detection pins - IMHO it'll be good to make hardware
> detection, but just report hardware failure, not to break programming
> process.
Yes, a sanity check makes sense.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
More information about the flashrom
mailing list