[flashrom] External programmer update

[Michael Karcher]

On 25.12.2015 03:03, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 14:04:21 -0700
> audiohacked at gmail.com (Sean Nelson) wrote:
>> On 5/28/10 9:48 AM, fritz wrote:
>>> However, the chip I wanted to program - Am29F040B - I could NOT detect.
>>>
>>> I'll spare you the in-depth story of the past twelve hours I've spent 
>>> working on it.
>>>
>>> The summary:
>>> Flashrom (from svn) would detect the other chips using addresses 
>>> 0x5555, 0x2AAA, 0x5555
>>> Flashrom (from svn) would try to detect the Am29F040 using addresses 
>>> 0x0555, 0x02AA, 0x0555 - which is not according to the datasheet.
>>>
>> The Problem is the Am29F040B uses 0x2AA variant, but the Am29F040 uses 
>> 0x2AAA. What AMD/Spansion did was change the command addresses without 
>> changing the chip ids. Sadly there's no way to distinguish between the two.
> Seems like they have done that between Am29F010 and Am29F010A as well
> (cf. "Not detecting Am29F010 using 3Com PCI nic" by Ignatius Grippa)...
>
> Actually, there is of course a way to distinguish them: probe once with
> FEATURE_ADDR_2AA and once with FEATURE_ADDR_2AAA :)
> I'll try to get Ignatius to test this...

The AMD Am29F040B is clearly probable with FEATURE_ADDR_2AAA, too. I am
looking at AMD publication 21445, Rev E, issued Novermber 29, 2000. Note
4 on page 14 indicates that: "Address bits A18–A11 are don’t cares for
unlock and command cycles, unless SA or PA required." 0x2800 (the
additional Bits in 0x2AAA compared to 0x2AA) are bits A11 and A13, so
this chip just doesn't care.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher