[flashrom] Ideas for implementing support for 2nd status register

[Stefan Tauner]

On Fri, 27 May 2016 03:12:22 +0530
Hatim Kanchwala <hatim at hatimak.me> wrote:

> So I incorporated the changes you suggested. Please have a look at the 
> updated attached file (output is here 
> http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=2919). IMO, the flashchip struct 
> abstracts the characteristics or behaviour of the flashchip and not its 
> state (like status register bits). For that reason, I have removed the 
> array of int. The struct not has pointers to struct 
> status_register_layout, like you pointed out. This is indeed a much more 
> elegant solution as many chips will have a lot in common. It was stupid 
> of me to go with the previous model. The two function pointers, 
> read_status and write_status, will also be modeled like the existing 
> printlock/prettyprint functions. A good change in the implementation due 
> to these changes was that I no longer required that INVALID bit.

It might make sense to have all the status register-related function
pointers in the model structs as well. If the status registers are
alike then the functions are probably as well.

One disadvantage of your current approach might be that the status
register pretty prints will be less expressive (in case we use your
print_status_register function exclusively and get rid of all the
various customized functions). Some of them are pretty complicated to
be as generic as possible and convey way more information than a simple
"is (not) set" semantic, e.g. spi_prettyprint_status_register_at45db.
However, combining your approach with the existing expressiveness may
lead to something quite complicated... I'll let you try to come up with
something useful :)

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner