[flashrom] [PATCH] Add support for GigaDevice GD25VQ41B

[Urja Rannikko]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:46 AM, Hatim Kanchwala <hatim at hatimak.me> wrote:
> On Friday 12 February 2016 01:18 AM, Hatim Kanchwala wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Hatim Kanchwala <hatim at hatimak.me>
>> ---
>>  flashchips.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  flashchips.h |  1 +
>>  2 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
>> index c60514b..26a8d89 100644
>> --- a/flashchips.c
>> +++ b/flashchips.c
>> @@ -6246,20 +6246,60 @@ const struct flashchip flashchips[] = {
>>                       }
>>               },
>>               .printlock      = spi_prettyprint_status_register_plain, /* TODO: improve */
>>               .unlock         = spi_disable_blockprotect,
>>               .write          = spi_chip_write_256,
>>               .read           = spi_chip_read,
>>               .voltage        = {2700, 3600},
>>       },
>>
>>       {
>> +             .vendor         = "GigaDevice",
>> +             .name           = "GD25VQ41B",
>> +             .bustype        = BUS_SPI,
>> +             .manufacture_id = GIGADEVICE_ID,
>> +             .model_id       = GIGADEVICE_GD25VQ41B,
>> +             .total_size     = 512,
>> +             .page_size      = 256,
>> +             /* OTP: 3 * 512B total; read 0x48, write 0x42, erase 0x44 */
>> +             .feature_bits   = FEATURE_WRSR_WREN | FEATURE_OTP | FEATURE_QPI,
These arent "truly/100%" OTP, but one-time-lockable "security
registers" - the effect is most likely
the same (=if they're used they're most likely locked and that makes
them effectively ROM), so
I'm ok with the FEATURE_OTP, but maybe change the comment, my suggestion:
/* Lockable Security Registers: 3 * 512B pages, read 0x48, write 0x42,
erase 0x44 */





-- 
Urja Rannikko