On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 06:13:00 +0200 Stefan Tauner <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patch set enables us to figure out if transactions will succeed > without executing them, which allows for a refactoring of > probe_spi_rdid_generic() which in consequence makes it possible to add > probe_spi_rdid_edi(). > Hi Stefan, was there any development towards the functionality discussed in this old thread: check_trans() and probe_spi_rdid_edi()? > The infrastructure code as a whole, but especially the ichspi code > is heavily modified. Please be aware of that if you test it on > mainboards. > > Antonio: please rebase your Spansion patch on this one and extend it > to add actually two chips by using the full 32 bit model IDs > (0x20184d00, 0x20184d01) and .probe = probe_spi_rdid_edi. > I am playing with these chips again. FTR I am able to read and write S25FL129P1 chips using flashrom v0.9.7-r1782 which is in Debian ubstable, it supports the similar "S25FL128S......0", but only the bulk erase function worked (spi_block_erase_60), I wasn't able to do a block or sector erase; can this depend on the programmer (ft2232_spi)? I will send a proper log the next time I write a chip. I have also tried to rebase this old set about check_trans() and probe_spi_rdid_edi() on top of the latest svn, I will check if the code still works but I wanted to ask first what the current status is, and if there is still interest to support rdid EDI. Thanks, Antonio -- Antonio Ospite http://ao2.it A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
