[flashrom] [PATCH 2/8] The AT25F512B is quite different from the other (yet unsupported) chips in the AT25F* familiy, so rename 512B-specific stuff.
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Thu Mar 31 08:35:38 CEST 2011
Am 15.03.2011 16:29 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner<stefan.tauner at student.tuwien.ac.at>
> ---
> chipdrivers.h | 3 +--
> flashchips.c | 6 ++++--
> spi25.c | 10 +---------
> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/chipdrivers.h b/chipdrivers.h
> index c01ab7a..dc46fe1 100644
> --- a/chipdrivers.h
> +++ b/chipdrivers.h
> @@ -45,13 +45,12 @@ int spi_chip_read(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len);
> uint8_t spi_read_status_register(void);
> int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25df(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25df_sec(struct flashchip *flash);
> -int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f(struct flashchip *flash);
> +int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f512b(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25fs010(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25fs040(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_disable_blockprotect(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df_sec(struct flashchip *flash);
> -int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25f(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25fs010(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25fs040(struct flashchip *flash);
> int spi_byte_program(int addr, uint8_t databyte);
> diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
> index 753a094..29a4da0 100644
> --- a/flashchips.c
> +++ b/flashchips.c
> @@ -1612,8 +1612,10 @@ struct flashchip flashchips[] = {
> .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
> }
> },
> - .printlock = spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f,
> - .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect_at25f,
> + .printlock = spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f512b,
> + /* spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df is not really the right way to do
> + * this, but the side effects of said function work here as well. */
>
For disabling block protection of SPI chips we have quite a few
functions where the side effects work just fine, but the comments inside
the function are not correct. Not sure if we have to list this in a
comment here or rather at the top of this unlock function because it is
used for multiple chips.
I see you just wanted to avoid the existing wrapper function and that
sort of makes sense... I'm undecided here.
> + .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df,
> .write = spi_chip_write_256,
> .read = spi_chip_read,
> },
> diff --git a/spi25.c b/spi25.c
> index c774032..5d73411 100644
> --- a/spi25.c
> +++ b/spi25.c
> @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25df_sec(struct flashchip *flash)
> return spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25df(flash);
> }
>
> -int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f(struct flashchip *flash)
> +int spi_prettyprint_status_register_at25f512b(struct flashchip *flash)
>
_at25f was originally intended as generic version usable by more AT25*
chips. I have a conflicting patch for this region, will repost it so we
can discuss how to merge them.
> {
> uint8_t status;
>
> @@ -1123,14 +1123,6 @@ int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df_sec(struct flashchip *flash)
> return spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df(flash);
> }
>
> -int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25f(struct flashchip *flash)
> -{
> - /* spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df is not really the right way to do
> - * this, but the side effects of said function work here as well.
> - */
> - return spi_disable_blockprotect_at25df(flash);
> -}
> -
> int spi_disable_blockprotect_at25fs010(struct flashchip *flash)
> {
> uint8_t status;
>
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
More information about the flashrom
mailing list