Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>
> Can you try the patch below? We need full output from flashrom -V.
>
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Index: flashrom-spi_pm25/flash.h
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-spi_pm25/flash.h (Revision 3086)
> +++ flashrom-spi_pm25/flash.h (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -158,7 +158,8 @@
> /* Programmable Micro Corp is listed in JEP106W in bank 2, so it should have
> * a 0x7F continuation code prefix.
> */
> -#define PMC_ID 0x9D /* PMC */
> +#define PMC_ID 0x7F9D /* PMC */
> +#define PMC_ID_NOPREFIX 0x9D /* PMC, missing 0x7F prefix */
> #define PMC_49FL002 0x6D
> #define PMC_49FL004 0x6E
>
> Index: flashrom-spi_pm25/flashchips.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-spi_pm25/flashchips.c (Revision 3086)
> +++ flashrom-spi_pm25/flashchips.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -100,9 +100,9 @@
> probe_49lfxxxc, erase_49lfxxxc, write_49lfxxxc},
> {"SST49LF160C", SST_ID, SST_49LF160C, 2048, 4 * 1024 ,
> probe_49lfxxxc, erase_49lfxxxc, write_49lfxxxc},
> - {"Pm49FL002", PMC_ID, PMC_49FL002, 256, 16 * 1024,
> + {"Pm49FL002", PMC_ID_NOPREFIX, PMC_49FL002, 256, 16 * 1024,
> probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_49fl004},
> - {"Pm49FL004", PMC_ID, PMC_49FL004, 512, 64 * 1024,
> + {"Pm49FL004", PMC_ID_NOPREFIX, PMC_49FL004, 512, 64 * 1024,
> probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_49fl004},
> {"W29C011", WINBOND_ID, W_29C011, 128, 128,
> probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec},
> @@ -205,6 +205,8 @@
> probe_spi, NULL, NULL},
> {"MX unknown SPI chip", MX_ID, GENERIC_DEVICE_ID, 0, 0,
> probe_spi, NULL, NULL},
> + {"PMC unknown SPI chip", PMC_ID, GENERIC_DEVICE_ID, 0, 0,
> + probe_spi, NULL, NULL},
> {"SST unknown SPI chip", SST_ID, GENERIC_DEVICE_ID, 0, 0,
> probe_spi, NULL, NULL},
> {"ST unknown SPI chip", ST_ID, GENERIC_DEVICE_ID, 0, 0,
> Index: flashrom-spi_pm25/spi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-spi_pm25/spi.c (Revision 3086)
> +++ flashrom-spi_pm25/spi.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -281,8 +281,14 @@
> uint8_t manuf_id;
> uint16_t model_id;
> if (!generic_spi_rdid(readarr)) {
> - manuf_id = readarr[0];
> - model_id = (readarr[1] << 8) | readarr[2];
> + /* Check if this is a continuation vendor ID */
> + if (readarr[0] == 0x7f) {
> + manuf_id = (readarr[0] << 8) | readarr[1];
> + model_id = readarr[2];
> + } else {
> + manuf_id = readarr[0];
> + model_id = (readarr[1] << 8) | readarr[2];
> + }
> printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%x, id2 0x%x\n", __FUNCTION__,
> manuf_id, model_id);
> if (manuf_id == flash->manufacture_id &&
> model_id == flash->model_id) {
I got version 3086, applied your patch, and the output is identical to
that already posted.
--
coreboot mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
