| Submitter | jharper@iseis.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-26 22:24:59 |
| Message ID | <20140226222459.48058yf02qt1uegg@webmail.iseis.com> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/4112/ |
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:24:59 +0000 jharper@iseis.com wrote: > This patch adds support for the SST25WF080 1 Mbyte SPI flash chip. It > has been very minimally tested (basically one each read/write/verify), > on Windows XP with a USB Blaster as the programmer. It worked, > although it was horribly slow (at least 15 minutes to program 1 MB) - > but I have not otherwise used this hardware/software combination to > program anything, so that might be normal. > - Jason Harper Hello Jason, thanks for the patch. It looks good apart from the .tested field which should be set to TEST_OK_PREW and I'd like to commit it. For that we need a proper declaration of authorship though. Please see http://www.coreboot.org/Development_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure Performance was always an issue with the Bus Pirate (especially with SST chips that required 1-byte writes), but I thought the FT2232-based programmers to be faster. If flashrom didn't complain about failing erases or something similar it is probably normal.
Quoting Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at>: > Hello Jason, > > thanks for the patch. It looks good apart from the .tested field which > should be set to TEST_OK_PREW and I'd like to commit it. For that we > need a proper declaration of authorship though. Please see > http://www.coreboot.org/Development_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure Ok, my previous patch is hereby... Signed-off-by: Jason Harper <jharper@iseis.com> I didn't feel comfortable setting the .tested field, given the extremely brief nature of my testing, and the fact that I just copied an existing SST device that was itself untested. Nothing I did would have verified that the smaller erase block sizes were correct, for example. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:33:31 +0000 jharper@iseis.com wrote: > Quoting Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at>: > > Hello Jason, > > > > thanks for the patch. It looks good apart from the .tested field which > > should be set to TEST_OK_PREW and I'd like to commit it. For that we > > need a proper declaration of authorship though. Please see > > http://www.coreboot.org/Development_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure > > Ok, my previous patch is hereby... > Signed-off-by: Jason Harper <jharper@iseis.com> Acked-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner@alumni.tuwien.ac.at> and committed in r1785. Additionally, I have refined status register prettyprinting and unlocking of the whole family. > I didn't feel comfortable setting the .tested field, given the > extremely brief nature of my testing, and the fact that I just copied > an existing SST device that was itself untested. Nothing I did would > have verified that the smaller erase block sizes were correct, for > example. Good enough, or at least equivalent to the flag's semantics ;) BTW flashrom uses the smallest (first) erase block size... so you have just tested the 4k eraser and not the *bigger* ones.
Patch
Index: flashchips.c =================================================================== --- flashchips.c (revision 1764) +++ flashchips.c (working copy) @@ -9665,6 +9665,43 @@ { .vendor = "SST", + .name = "SST25WF080", + .bustype = BUS_SPI, + .manufacture_id = SST_ID, + .model_id = SST_SST25WF080, + .total_size = 1024, + .page_size = 256, + .feature_bits = FEATURE_WRSR_EITHER, + .tested = TEST_UNTESTED, + .probe = probe_spi_rdid, + .probe_timing = TIMING_ZERO, + .block_erasers = + { + { + .eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 256} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_20, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {32 * 1024, 32} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_52, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 16} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {1024 * 1024, 1} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_60, + }, { + .eraseblocks = { {1024 * 1024, 1} }, + .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7, + }, + }, + .unlock = spi_disable_blockprotect, + .write = spi_aai_write, + .read = spi_chip_read, /* Fast read (0x0B) supported */ + .voltage = {1650, 1950}, + }, + + { + .vendor = "SST", .name = "SST28SF040A", .bustype = BUS_PARALLEL, .manufacture_id = SST_ID, Index: flashchips.h =================================================================== --- flashchips.h (revision 1764) +++ flashchips.h (working copy) @@ -571,6 +571,7 @@ #define SST_SST25WF010 0x2502 #define SST_SST25WF020 0x2503 #define SST_SST25WF040 0x2504 +#define SST_SST25WF080 0x2505 #define SST_SST25VF512A_REMS 0x48 /* REMS or RES opcode */ #define SST_SST25VF010_REMS 0x49 /* REMS or RES opcode */ #define SST_SST25VF020_REMS 0x43 /* REMS or RES opcode */