Hello Anastasia, Many thanks for your quick reply!
This needs to be designed... for example, what are the possible sizes > of those smaller EEPROMs? can that be any size, or only a few standard > options (like 256 and 512 bytes)? Microchip has 128, 192, 256 and 512 byte EEPROMs (below 1024 bytes). They do offer a DFP (bunch of XML device descriptors) from which the flash descriptors could be generated. -- Miklos Anastasia Klimchuk <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2024. aug. 15., Cs, 14:50): > Hello Miklos, > > I remember this, I was in a (somewhat) similar situation when I was > writing unit tests. The total_size is in kilobytes and so the smallest > size would be 1 kilobyte. While I only needed 16 bytes for test > scenarios. The workaround for unit tests is to put 1 as total_size, > then have 1024 bytes as a "total memory" but only really care about > the first 16 bytes. > > I think you can try something in that direction. Something like, what > if you put 1 as total_size (not 0), and then create a layout with one > region of 512 bytes (or how much is real-total-size), and only operate > on this region. > Do you have a work in progress code that you could upload as a WIP > patch? It might be easier to talk over the code. > > Both layout boundaries, and erase block sizes are measured in bytes, > so they can be defined in an actual size. > > > Is supporting smaller EEPROMs considered a feature what could be merged > at some point > > I think yes, why not merge a useful feature. If we figure out the > working solution :) > > This needs to be designed... for example, what are the possible sizes > of those smaller EEPROMs? can that be any size, or only a few standard > options (like 256 and 512 bytes)? > > Maybe it can be a feature flag (FEATURE_MICRO256B or something like > that), and then with this feature flag layout with 256 bytes region > can be silently created. > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 12:10 AM Miklós Márton > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > I tried to add support for some Microchip serial EEPROMs to being able > to program them with an STLinkV3. I ran into problems with the smaller > EEPROMs for e.g. 25LC040 which is only a 4Kbit device. > > > > The total_size in the flashchip structure is an unsigned int so I could > only enter 0 as total size. > > > > In this case the flashrom shows the following message to me: > > ERROR: Flash chip 25C040 erase function 0 region walking resulted in > 0x000200 bytes total, expected 0x000000 bytes. Please report a bug at > [email protected] > > ERROR: Flash chip 25C040 erase function 0 is not in order. Please report > a bug at [email protected] > > > > Is there any recommendations how to overcome on this? > > Is supporting smaller EEPROMs considered a feature what could be merged > at some point, or the flashrom is going to focus purely on flash memories? > > > > -- > > Miklos > > _______________________________________________ > > flashrom mailing list -- [email protected] > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > > > -- > Anastasia. >
_______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
