Quoting Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > David H. Barr wrote: >> On 3/21/07, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On 21.03.2007 01:53, David H. Barr wrote: >>>> On 3/20/07, David H. Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> I have not yet issued a write in the ORG position, only read and >>>>> verify. I >>>>> erased the Pm49FL004 flash part present in the BIOS Savior, not >>>>> the onboard >>>>> W39V040B. >>>> Long story short, flashrom -w is a no-go for this board (MSI K9N Neo f >>>> / ms7260). >>>> >>>> Anyhoo, chalk another board on the "needs vendor mojo to enable >>>> writes" list. >>>> For the record, the vendor-supplied utility is "AMIFlh.exe" from AMIBIOS. >>> Does AMIFLH.exe work in dosemu or some other environment where it can be >>> aborted while flashing so we can find out if an aborted AMIFLH is enough >>> for flashrom -w to work? >> >> A few unsorted thoughts: >> >> - the correct name of this tool is AFUDOS; AMIFLH is a vendor re-badge >> - the same type of utility from Award / Phoenix is AWDFLASH >> - MSI uses both AWD and AMI BIOS images, so the "mojo" may be present >> in both utilities (a generic enable sequence? a list of enable >> sequences?) >> - as you mention, what about aborts / interrupts >> - what about a binary patch against one of these tools to "force" a write >> - along that same line, what about disabling one or more section of these >> tools to end up with a simple "enabler", or a brute force writer, or ??? >> - my hunch tells me the AWDFLASH util is more logical, and therefore >> easier to toy with; AFUDOS appears to be built on top of another tool >> >> I'll try some follow-up with various dos-type environments to see if >> that particular avenue of investigation takes me anywhere. I'd be >> happy with any clearly legal solution that can be a) reliably >> reproduced, b) documented, and c) automated. >> >> -dhb. >> > > Probably a stupid question, but why don't we just ask the uniflash > developer how he figured it out? He's got support for several different > boards with special locking mechanisms. > > -Corey > > -- > linuxbios mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios > I ack that Corey, I think uniflash is much more powerful than any of the vender provided dos flashing tools available!
Thanks - Joe -- linuxbios mailing list [email protected] http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
