On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:37:57 +0200 Nico Huber <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am not entirely sure why the translation table was introduced in the > > first place although dediprog's indices could be "stored" in the array > > offset, but mixing the two approaches is of course not a good idea. > The translation table was used to make it obvious that the speeds are > not ordered (see speed values for 12M and 8M). As the value range is > continuous, we could use the array index as value. But please, comment > on the interchanged speeds, when doing so. > > Well, I see one flaw in the current code: The default value for > spispeed_idx in dediprog_init() (2 --> 8M) doesn't match the value > mentioned in the manpage (12M). That's exactly why I started looking at it. I even had a patch that changed the default frequency in the manpage already :) No idea how I cam up with that stupid change... thanks for catching that. Obviously I got quite confused by the 3 ways of communicating the requested SPI frequency (the string, the index of the array, the integer that is stored in the array and gets transferred to the programmer). I think that is kinda awkward although I see the point of course. I will leave it alone anyway since it is there already and we don't know what Dediprog might bring us in the future ;) I will however change the default spispeed_idx from 2 to 1 matching the manpage and the default of Dediprog's CLI tool. -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
