[flashrom] [PATCH] Macronix MX25L6445E

Wagner, Helge (GE Intelligent Platforms) Helge.Wagner at ge.com
Fri Jun 3 11:51:52 CEST 2011


any comments for the MX25L6445E?

Helge Wagner

-----Original Message-----
From: flashrom-bounces at flashrom.org [mailto:flashrom-bounces at flashrom.org] On Behalf Of Wagner, Helge (GE Intelligent Platforms)
Sent: Montag, 30. Mai 2011 14:08
To: flashrom at flashrom.org
Subject: [flashrom] [PATCH] Macronix MX25L6445E


i have tried to reprogram a Macronix MX25L6445E flash chip. This worked, but gave me an error message:

ERASE FAILED at 0x0001107f! Expected=0xff, Read=0x00, failed byte count from 0x00010000-0x0001ffff: 0x9c15 ERASE FAILED!

Looking deeper into the datasheet, i saw that the MX25L6445E has the same ID as the MX25L6405, but with (at least) one difference:
The MX25L6405 has a block size of 64KByte for erase function 20h, while the MX25L6445E is using 4KByte sector size for the same erase function 20h. As a result the spi_block_erase_20() will fail for the MX25L6445E (while the spi_block_erase_d8() which is used then will succeed).

I have now re-ordered the erase functions for the MX25L6405/MX25L6445E:
spi_block_erase_d8      - first
spi_block_erase_60       - second
spi_block_erase_c7       - third
spi_block_erase_20       - last
So if one of the d8/60/c7 erase functions are successfull, the spi_block_erase_20 will never be called.

To be sure that the spi_block_erase_20 works for both the MX25L6405 and the MX25L6445E, we could change the block erase size from 64K to 4K. This should work even for the MX25L6405, but with the side effect of the erase taking longer than needed.

Any comments?

Please find my patches included.
Signed-off-by: Helge Wagner <Helge.Wagner at ge.com>


Helge Wagner
Software Engineer
Intelligent Platforms

More information about the flashrom mailing list