| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| ... | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Corresponding to flashrom svn r723.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
Acked-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I decided to fill in the info for a
few chips to illustrate how this works both for uniform and non-uniform
sector sizes.
struct eraseblock{
int size; /* Eraseblock size */
int count; /* Number of contiguous blocks with that size */
};
struct eraseblock doesn't correspond with a single erase block, but with
a group of contiguous erase blocks having the same size.
Given a (top boot block) flash chip with the following weird, but
real-life structure:
top
16384
8192
8192
32768
65536
65536
65536
65536
65536
65536
65536
bottom
we get the following encoding:
{65536,7},{32768,1},{8192,2},{16384,1}
Although the number of blocks is bigger than 4, the number of block
groups is only 4. If you ever add some flash chips with more than 4
contiguous block groups, the definition will not fit into the 4-member
array anymore and gcc will recognize that and error out. No undetected
overflow possible. In that case, you simply increase array size a bit.
For modern flash chips with uniform erase block size, you only need one
array member anyway.
Of course data types will need to be changed if you ever get flash chips
with more than 2^30 erase blocks, but even with the lowest known erase
granularity of 256 bytes, these flash chips will have to have a size of
a quarter Terabyte. I'm pretty confident we won't see such big EEPROMs
in the near future (or at least not attached in a way that makes
flashrom usable). For SPI chips, we even have a guaranteed safety factor
of 4096 over the maximum SPI chip size (which is 2^24). And if such a
big flash chip has uniform erase block size, you could even split it
among the 4 array members. If you change int count to unsigned int
count, the storable size doubles. So with a split and a slight change of
data type, the maximum ROM chip size is 2 Terabytes.
Since many chips have multiple block erase functions where the
eraseblock layout depends on the block erase function, this patch
couples the block erase functions with their eraseblock layouts.
struct block_eraser {
struct eraseblock{
unsigned int size; /* Eraseblock size */
unsigned int count; /* Number of contiguous blocks with that size */
} eraseblocks[NUM_ERASEREGIONS];
int (*block_erase) (struct flashchip *flash, unsigned int blockaddr, unsigned int blocklen);
} block_erasers[NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS];
Corresponding to flashrom svn r719.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The __func__ variant is standardized in C99 and recommended to be
used instead of __FUNCTION__ in the gcc info page.
Only _very_ old versions of gcc did not know about __func__, but we've
been using both __func__ and __FUNCTION__ for a long while now, and
nobody complained about this, so all our users seem to use recent
enough compilers.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r711.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe@hermann-uwe.de>
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We can't remove ft2232_spi.o from unconditional OBJS yet due to our
makefile structure (make features), but this patch adds #ifdefs around
all FT2232H code, so the net effect is the same.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r691.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This allows us to reduce #ifdef clauses a lot if we compile out some
programmers completely.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r679.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some SPI chip drivers and the generic 1-byte SPI chip write functions
didn't include the automatic erase present in other chip drivers.
Since the majority is definitely auto-erase, change the remaining
explicit-erase cases to be auto-erase as well.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r673.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Carlos Arnau Perez <cemede@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some drivers support only a few combinations of read/write length and
return error otherwise. Having a distinct return code for this error
means we can handle it in upper layers.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r653.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Tested-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
Corresponding to flashrom svn r651.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Tested it on Epia-m700 worked okay.
Acked-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some SPI opcodes need to be sent in direct succession after each other
without any chip deselect happening in between. A prominent example is
WREN (Write Enable) directly before PP (Page Program). Intel calls the
first opcode in such a row "preopcode".
Right now, we ignore the direct succession requirement completely and it
works pretty well because most onboard SPI masters have a timing or
heuristics which make the problem disappear.
The FT2232 SPI flasher is different. Since it is an external flasher,
timing is very different to what we can expect from onboard flashers and
this leads to failure at slow speeds.
This patch allows any function to submit multiple SPI commands in a
stream to any flasher. Support in the individual flashers isn't
implemented yet, so there is one generic function which passes the each
command in the stream one-by-one to the command functions of the
selected SPI flash driver.
Tested-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
Corresponding to flashrom svn r645.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
B.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r638.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Tested-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Jakob Bornecrantz <wallbraker@gmail.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- Properly escape '-' chars in manpage.
- Fix typo in chipset_enable.c.
- Drop useless 'return' in chip_readn().
- Random other whitespace or cosmetic fixes.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r636.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe@hermann-uwe.de>
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe@hermann-uwe.de>
|
|
|
chip from FTDI
FTDI support is autodetected during compilation.
Paul writes:
There are certainly possible improvements: The code has hard-coded
values for which interface of the ftdi chip to use (interface B was
chosen because libftdi seems to have trouble with A right now), what
clock rate use for the SPI interface (I've been running at 30Mhz, but
the patch sets it to 10Mhz), and possibly others. I think this means
that per-programmer options might be a good idea at some point.
Carl-Daniel writes:
There is one additional FIXME comment in the code, but AFAICS that
problem is not solvable with current libftdi.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r598.
Signed-off-by: Paul Fox <pgf@laptop.org>
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe@hermann-uwe.de>
|
