Patchwork Mark w25q80, w25q32, and w25q64 chips tested for write and erase

login
register
about
Submitter David Hendricks
Date 2010-10-15 03:27:23
Message ID <AANLkTimxeWCgRQ7dr7ktLY5fh+MBxXGRYe_GJNgd8Nne@mail.gmail.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/2114/
State Accepted
Commit 1303
Headers show

Comments

David Hendricks - 2010-10-15 03:27:23
I'm actually not entirely sure why the W25Q80 and W25Q32 were marked as "OK"
for erase but not write. In any case, I've successfully read/erased/written
all three of these Winbond chips using nm10 and amd870 based mainboards.

I see no reason why the W25Q16 would not work as well, but I don't have one
to try so I left it out of this patch.

Signed-off-by: David Hendricks <dhendrix@google.com>
Stefan Reinauer - 2010-10-18 23:09:24
* David Hendricks <dhendrix@google.com> [101015 05:27]:
> I'm actually not entirely sure why the W25Q80 and W25Q32 were marked as "OK"
> for erase but not write. In any case, I've successfully read/erased/written all
> three of these Winbond chips using nm10 and amd870 based mainboards.
> 
> I see no reason why the W25Q16 would not work as well, but I don't have one to
> try so I left it out of this patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Hendricks <dhendrix@google.com>

Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coreboot.org>

> 
> --
> David Hendricks (dhendrix)
> Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.

> Index: flashrom-foo/flashchips.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-foo.orig/flashchips.c	2010-10-14 20:18:44.000000000 -0700
> +++ flashrom-foo/flashchips.c	2010-10-14 20:19:04.000000000 -0700
> @@ -7009,7 +7009,7 @@
>  		.total_size	= 1024,
>  		.page_size	= 256,
>  		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
> -		.tested		= TEST_OK_PRE,
> +		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
>  		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
>  		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
>  		.block_erasers	=
> @@ -7081,7 +7081,7 @@
>  		.total_size	= 4096,
>  		.page_size	= 256,
>  		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
> -		.tested		= TEST_OK_PRE,
> +		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
>  		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
>  		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
>  		.block_erasers	=
> @@ -7117,7 +7117,7 @@
>  		.total_size	= 8192,
>  		.page_size	= 256,
>  		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
> -		.tested		= TEST_OK_PR,
> +		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
>  		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
>  		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
>  		.block_erasers	=
Stefan Tauner - 2011-05-18 01:45:49
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:27:23 -0000
David Hendricks <dhendrix@google.com> wrote:

> I'm actually not entirely sure why the W25Q80 and W25Q32 were marked as "OK"
> for erase but not write. In any case, I've successfully read/erased/written
> all three of these Winbond chips using nm10 and amd870 based mainboards.
> 
> I see no reason why the W25Q16 would not work as well, but I don't have one
> to try so I left it out of this patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Hendricks <dhendrix@google.com>
> Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coreboot.org>

applied in r1303, thanks

Patch

Index: flashrom-foo/flashchips.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-foo.orig/flashchips.c	2010-10-14 20:18:44.000000000 -0700
+++ flashrom-foo/flashchips.c	2010-10-14 20:19:04.000000000 -0700
@@ -7009,7 +7009,7 @@ 
 		.total_size	= 1024,
 		.page_size	= 256,
 		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
-		.tested		= TEST_OK_PRE,
+		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
 		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
 		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
 		.block_erasers	=
@@ -7081,7 +7081,7 @@ 
 		.total_size	= 4096,
 		.page_size	= 256,
 		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
-		.tested		= TEST_OK_PRE,
+		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
 		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
 		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
 		.block_erasers	=
@@ -7117,7 +7117,7 @@ 
 		.total_size	= 8192,
 		.page_size	= 256,
 		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN,
-		.tested		= TEST_OK_PR,
+		.tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
 		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
 		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
 		.block_erasers	=