[flashrom] [PATCH 2/3] fix and add a few chipset_enables entries

Uwe Hermann uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Sat Jun 18 15:12:15 CEST 2011

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:44:43PM +0200, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Idwer Vollering <vidwer at gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at student.tuwien.ac.at>
> ---
>  chipset_enable.c |   12 +++++++++---
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/chipset_enable.c b/chipset_enable.c
> index 3a2febc..5907b86 100644
> --- a/chipset_enable.c
> +++ b/chipset_enable.c
> @@ -1115,8 +1115,8 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = {
>  	{0x1106, 0x3372, OK, "VIA", "VT8237S",		enable_flash_vt8237s_spi},
>  	{0x1106, 0x8231, NT, "VIA", "VT8231",		enable_flash_vt823x},
>  	{0x1106, 0x8324, OK, "VIA", "CX700",		enable_flash_vt823x},
> -	{0x1106, 0x8353, OK, "VIA", "VX800",		enable_flash_vt8237s_spi},
> -	{0x1106, 0x8409, OK, "VIA", "VX855",		enable_flash_vt823x},
> +	{0x1106, 0x8353, OK, "VIA", "VX800/VX820",	enable_flash_vt8237s_spi},
> +	{0x1106, 0x8409, OK, "VIA", "VX855/VX875",	enable_flash_vt823x},
>  	{0x1166, 0x0200, OK, "Broadcom", "OSB4",	enable_flash_osb4},
>  	{0x1166, 0x0205, OK, "Broadcom", "HT-1000",	enable_flash_ht1000},
>  	{0x8086, 0x122e, OK, "Intel", "PIIX",		enable_flash_piix4},
> @@ -1125,14 +1125,17 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = {
>  	{0x8086, 0x2420, OK, "Intel", "ICH0",		enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x2440, OK, "Intel", "ICH2",		enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x244c, OK, "Intel", "ICH2-M",		enable_flash_ich_4e},
> +//	{0x8086, 0x2450, NT, "Intel", "C-ICH",		enable_flash_ich_4e}, /* http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/27359901.pdf */

Correct, but please drop the comment. You could also uncomment the line
(but leave NT) as chances are very high it will work.

>  	{0x8086, 0x2480, OK, "Intel", "ICH3-S",		enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x248c, OK, "Intel", "ICH3-M",		enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x24c0, OK, "Intel", "ICH4/ICH4-L",	enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x24cc, OK, "Intel", "ICH4-M",		enable_flash_ich_4e},

>  	{0x8086, 0x24d0, OK, "Intel", "ICH5/ICH5R",	enable_flash_ich_4e},
> +//	{0x8086, 0x24dc, NT, "Intel", "ICH5/ICH5R",	enable_flash_ich_4e}, /* http://www.intel.com/assets/pdf/datasheet/252516.pdf */

This is a duplicate entry? I cannot find 0x24dc in the datasheet, 0x24d0
is the correct device ID for ICH5/ICH5R. I'd rather drop this entry for now
(and the comment).

>  	{0x8086, 0x25a1, OK, "Intel", "6300ESB",	enable_flash_ich_4e},
>  	{0x8086, 0x2640, OK, "Intel", "ICH6/ICH6R",	enable_flash_ich_dc},
>  	{0x8086, 0x2641, OK, "Intel", "ICH6-M",		enable_flash_ich_dc},
> +//	{0x8086, 0x2642, NT, "Intel", "ICH6W/ICH6RW",	enable_flash_ich_dc}, /* bios_cntl is at 0xdc? http://www3.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/301473.pdf, pci id: http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/ITCO_WDT.html */

PCI ID is correct, 0xdc for BIOS_CTNL is also correct according to the
ICH6W/ICH6RW datasheet. Please remove the comments.

You could also uncomment this entry, it's very likely to be correct and
work (but leave it as NT for now).

>  	{0x8086, 0x2670, OK, "Intel", "631xESB/632xESB/3100", enable_flash_ich_dc},
>  	{0x8086, 0x27b0, OK, "Intel", "ICH7DH",		enable_flash_ich7},
>  	{0x8086, 0x27b8, OK, "Intel", "ICH7/ICH7R",	enable_flash_ich7},
> @@ -1151,10 +1154,12 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = {
>  	{0x8086, 0x2917, OK, "Intel", "ICH9M-E",	enable_flash_ich9},
>  	{0x8086, 0x2918, OK, "Intel", "ICH9",		enable_flash_ich9},
>  	{0x8086, 0x2919, OK, "Intel", "ICH9M",		enable_flash_ich9},
> +//	{0x8086, 0x3a10, NT, "Intel", "ICH10R",		enable_flash_ich10}, /* engineering sample http://pci-ids.ucw.cz/read/PC/8086/3a10 and http://www.radisys.com/files/support_downloads/03292-00_ATCA-4500_CPM_Reference.pdf */

IDs are OK, but please drop the comments. At most "/* ES */" or so, if
you want.

>  	{0x8086, 0x3a14, OK, "Intel", "ICH10DO",	enable_flash_ich10},
>  	{0x8086, 0x3a16, OK, "Intel", "ICH10R",		enable_flash_ich10},
>  	{0x8086, 0x3a18, OK, "Intel", "ICH10",		enable_flash_ich10},
>  	{0x8086, 0x3a1a, OK, "Intel", "ICH10D",		enable_flash_ich10},

> +//	{0x8086, 0x3a1e, NT, "Intel", "ICH10",		enable_flash_ich10}, /* ICH10 engineering sample. http://pci-ids.ucw.cz/read/PC/8086/3a1e */

/* ES */ or no comment IMHO, see above.

>  	{0x8086, 0x3b00, NT, "Intel", "3400 Desktop",	enable_flash_ich10},
>  	{0x8086, 0x3b01, NT, "Intel", "3400 Mobile",	enable_flash_ich10},
>  	{0x8086, 0x3b02, NT, "Intel", "P55",		enable_flash_ich10},
> @@ -1176,7 +1181,8 @@ const struct penable chipset_enables[] = {
>  	{0x8086, 0x7000, OK, "Intel", "PIIX3",		enable_flash_piix4},
>  	{0x8086, 0x7110, OK, "Intel", "PIIX4/4E/4M",	enable_flash_piix4},
>  	{0x8086, 0x7198, OK, "Intel", "440MX",		enable_flash_piix4},
> -	{0x8086, 0x8119, OK, "Intel", "Poulsbo",	enable_flash_poulsbo},
> +	{0x8086, 0x8119, OK, "Intel", "SCH Poulsbo",	enable_flash_poulsbo},
> +//	{0x8086, 0x8186, NT, "Intel", "Atom E6xx(T)/Tunnel Creek", enable_flash_poulsbo?}, /* document number 324208 */

IDs are correct, comment can be dropped. The "?" from
enable_flash_poulsbo can also be dropped I guess, the register bits used
in enable_flash_poulsbo() are the same for "Atom E6xx(T)/Tunnel Creek",
thus chances are good that it might work. You could also uncomment the
line for that reason (but leave NT).

With the above changes:
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe at hermann-uwe.de>

http://hermann-uwe.de     | http://sigrok.org
http://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org

More information about the flashrom mailing list