On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 00:11:11 +0800 Chi Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:
> The programmer is my newly built serprog with STM32 MCU. Please refer to > https://github.com/dword1511/serprog-stm32vcp . Nice stuff :) What was the motivation for that project? Should we add it to http://flashrom.org/Serprog ? > These flash chips are first bought to test the programmer rather than > flashrom > itself :) The programmer has been verified by me with a commercial > CH341A-based > programmer, and a few bricks as well :) > > Some performance information about flashrom with these chips can be found at: > https://github.com/dword1511/serprog-stm32vcp/blob/master/PERFORMANCE > (btw, SST25VF040B is really slow at writing! Is it supposed to be this slow?) I think the problem is the AAI write mode. It requires a lot of tiny communication steps and this is were serprog, CDC and USB are really bad at... (long round trip times). > The pasted logs are organized in probe-write-read-erase sequences. > > AT25F512A: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1569 Added to my tested_stuff branch. > AT26DF161A: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1570 That one needs some further analysis: "Some block protection in effect, disabling... Block protection could not be disabled!" > EN25F05: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1571 Added to my tested_stuff branch. > MX25L12845E(mistaken as 'MX25L12805(D)'): > http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1572 Macronix really likes to share IDs... we need to look at the 45 series more closely. > Pm25LV010A: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1573 Added to my "Refine PMC Pm25LV series" patch. http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/3926/ You probably want to take a look at this patch too as it adds support for the Pm25LD512C you have in your performance file: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/3925/ > SST25VF040B: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1574 > SST25VF040B with REMS: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1575 > M25P05-A: http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1576 All added to my tested_stuff branch. Also, there exists a patch set that adds support for the AT45DB161D, but we have not decided if we want to go with that implementation. See http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/3873/ etc. The two sanyo chips are completely unsupported yet I think... Thanks a lot for your effort! -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
