[flashrom] flashrom support for EP-9NPA7I

[Stefan Tauner]

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 08:49:13 -0400
Joshua Roys <roysjosh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 06/20/2011 03:45 PM, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:54:31 -0500
> > "Colin L. Rice"<dah4k0r at gmail.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry for missing you guys earlier. It works.
> >>
> >> Note that this is an EP-9NPa7I. But eh whatever.
> >
> > jup i am aware of that. i have a fix for the "misdetection", but it was
> > on purpose that i let you try the 0x92 patch without that fix.
> > thanks a lot for your testing! your board will be supported in one way
> > or another by the next release.
> >
> >> Output:
> >>
> >> flashrom v0.9.3-r1338 on Linux 2.6.38-8-generic (x86_64), built with libpci
> >> 3.1.7, GCC 4.5.2, little endian
> >> flashrom is free software, get the source code at http://www.flashrom.org
> >>
> >> Calibrating delay loop... delay loop is unreliable, trying to continue OK.
> >> Found chipset "NVIDIA CK804", enabling flash write... OK.
> >> This chipset supports the following protocols: Non-SP.
> >> Disabling flash write protection for board "EPoX EP-8NPA7I"... OK.
> >> Found chip "SST SST49LF004A/B" (512 kB, FWH) at physical address 0xfff80000.
> >> Flash image seems to be a legacy BIOS. Disabling coreboot-related checks.
> >> Erasing and writing flash chip... Done.
> >> Verifying flash... VERIFIED.
> >
> > so. the patch from jonathan works for this board too (besides the
> > EP-8NPA7I and a bunch of others according to him).
> > the question now is if we want to enable it for all ck804 boards by
> > default (i.e. ack the patch as is), or if we wanna put it in a board
> > enable.
> > i think it is ok to apply it as is, even if we are not 100% sure it is
> > safe everywhere.
> > please speak out now if you differ before i ack it.
> >
> 
> I've seen this in at least 3 board enables recently, so:
> Acked-by: Joshua Roys <roysjosh at gmail.com>

hm... last question hopefully:
can you remember any MCP51 boards that needed the 0x92 register cleared
too? because we use the ck808 init for those too...
we can test this with the last report from Márton Miklós, but if it
does not need it this patch, i would not know what to do... :)
-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner