Patchwork Factor out lock functions (print, unlock, lock)

login
register
about
Submitter Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
Date 2009-11-23 12:53:29
Message ID <4B0A85C9.6080608@gmx.net>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/581/
State Bitrotted
Headers show

Comments

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger - 2009-11-23 12:53:29
On 20.11.2009 00:05, Maciej Pijanka wrote:
> How about adding dummy operation to enum and something like
>
> case dummy_op:
> default:
>
> in switch clause, first to use 0 value to dummy op, also to make more
> explicit what
> default really is.

Adding a dummy enum which does nothing doesn't look like it would help.
Apologies if I'm missing your point.


> Additionally i didn't saw any routine that lets check if current chip
> has any lock abilities like
> spi_lock(somechip, lock_query) which would return if any locks are
> available or something that
> code may use it to check if locking is available (regardless of
> presence routine in chip data)
> for this chip.
>
> Maybe this isn't really needed but we have routine that sets and
> resets lock, prints info to user
> but no routine that could poll status of lock or verify if chip has
> locking abilities at all.

Good point. Updated patch below.

Chip locking has four actions you can do with it:
- Print the current locking status
- Read the current locking status
- Lock the chip
- Unlock the chip.

Currently, the code usually does lock printing inside the probe
function, and unlocking somewhere in the erase or write function. Only
very few chips reactivate the lock after write/erase. Since many chips
have identical probe/write/erase functions, but totally different
locking, many such functions have been duplicated needlessly.
With this patch, it is possible to call the chip-specific locking
functions from probe/write/erase functions and unify lots of code.

Thanks to Maciej Pijanka for pointing out that a lock read function was
missing in the previous version.

Thanks to Edward O'Callaghan for checking the coding style and pointing
out a comma at the end of an enum list which is only allowed in C99 or
later (did I understand that correctly?). Given that flashrom uses lots
of other C99 constructs, this doesn't seem to be a problem, but we may
want to specify C99 mode to the compiler (or GNU99) to get proper treatment.

Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Maciej Pijanka - 2009-11-23 17:49:47
On pon, 23 lis 2009, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:

> On 20.11.2009 00:05, Maciej Pijanka wrote:
> > How about adding dummy operation to enum and something like
> >
> > case dummy_op:
> > default:
> >
> > in switch clause, first to use 0 value to dummy op, also to make more
> > explicit what
> > default really is.
> 
> Adding a dummy enum which does nothing doesn't look like it would help.
> Apologies if I'm missing your point.

Its maybe a habit that didnt have much reasons to include dummy op when using
integer op enumeration. This was only my point, or i already forgot other reason.

> > Additionally i didn't saw any routine that lets check if current chip
> > has any lock abilities like
> > spi_lock(somechip, lock_query) which would return if any locks are
> > available or something that
> > code may use it to check if locking is available (regardless of
> > presence routine in chip data)
> > for this chip.
> >
> > Maybe this isn't really needed but we have routine that sets and
> > resets lock, prints info to user
> > but no routine that could poll status of lock or verify if chip has
> > locking abilities at all.
> 
> Good point. Updated patch below.
> 
> Chip locking has four actions you can do with it:
> - Print the current locking status
> - Read the current locking status
> - Lock the chip
> - Unlock the chip.
>
> 
> Currently, the code usually does lock printing inside the probe
> function, and unlocking somewhere in the erase or write function. Only
> very few chips reactivate the lock after write/erase. Since many chips
> have identical probe/write/erase functions, but totally different
> locking, many such functions have been duplicated needlessly.
> With this patch, it is possible to call the chip-specific locking
> functions from probe/write/erase functions and unify lots of code.

While i like different return for fail/success/not supported i think
separate return code for unable-to-determine-if-we-failed might be good
because that way we let upper layer decide if fail in this case is disaster 
or not. Also maybe refining in this way could lead that no lock/unlock code
need to use fprintf, only use some shared buffer to leave message if any
and return code leaving decision how to print/log output to caller code, thus
making future libflashrom more flexible (ie, imagine that somebody not 
redirect stderr stream while link Xapp with libflashrom, then all printed on
stderr that he forget to catch otherwise is lost)

Otherwise code looks fine for me, i left two parts of code and comments to them
below.

> Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c	(Revision 769)
> +++ flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c	(Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -467,39 +451,76 @@
>  		bpt[(status & 0x1c) >> 2]);
>  }
>  
> -void spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash)
> +/*
> + * Return 0 if successful, 1 if failed, 2 if unsupported.
> + */
> +int spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash)
>  {
>  	uint8_t status;
> +	int result = 2;
>  
>  	status = spi_read_status_register();
>  	printf_debug("Chip status register is %02x\n", status);
>  	switch (flash->manufacture_id) {
>  	case ST_ID:
>  		if (((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000) ||
> -		    ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2500))
> +		    ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2500)) {
>  			spi_prettyprint_status_register_st_m25p(status);
> +			result = 0;
> +		}
>  		break;
>  	case MX_ID:
> -		if ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000)
> +		if ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000) {
>  			spi_prettyprint_status_register_st_m25p(status);
> +			result = 0;
> +		}
>  		break;
>  	case SST_ID:
>  		switch (flash->model_id) {
>  		case 0x2541:
>  			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf016(status);
> +			result = 0;
>  			break;
>  		case 0x8d:
>  		case 0x258d:
>  			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf040b(status);
> +			result = 0;
>  			break;
>  		default:
>  			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25(status);
> +			result = 0;
>  			break;
>  		}
>  		break;
>  	}
> +
> +	if (result == 2)
> +		fprintf(stderr, "Printing lock status not supported.\n");
> +	return result;
>  }

What about default case in code above to detect situation when somebody has not supported
yet spi chip and maybe give more informative warning message ?
  
> Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c	(Revision 769)
> +++ flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c	(Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -509,6 +509,26 @@
>  	printf("Found chip \"%s %s\" (%d KB, %s) at physical address 0x%lx.\n",
>  	       flash->vendor, flash->name, flash->total_size,
>  	       flashbuses_to_text(flash->bustype), base);
> +	/* Print the locking status. */
> +	if (flash->lock) {
> +		flash->lock(flash, lock_print);
> +		switch (flash->lock(flash, lock_check_unlocked)) {
> +		case 0:
> +			printf_debug("Chip is completely unlocked or does not "
> +				     "support locking.");
> +			break;
> +		case 1:
> +			printf_debug("Chip is partially/completely locked.\n");
> +			break;
> +		case 2:
> +			printf_debug("Chip locking status could not be "
> +				     "determined.\n");
> +			break;
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		printf_debug("This chip has not been converted to the new chip "
> +			     "locking infrastructure yet.\n");
> +	}
>  
>  	return flash;
>  }

In code above i would like to get exact answer is chip unlocked or not support locking
or can't query if its locked (and this is feature of hardware not an error etc).

Best regards
Maciej

Patch

Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/flash.h
===================================================================
--- flashrom-lock_refactor/flash.h	(Revision 769)
+++ flashrom-lock_refactor/flash.h	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -175,6 +175,13 @@ 
 	CHIP_BUSTYPE_UNKNOWN	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_PARALLEL | CHIP_BUSTYPE_LPC | CHIP_BUSTYPE_FWH | CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
 };
 
+enum lockaction {
+	lock_check_unlocked, 	/* Check if the chip is completely unlocked or doesn't support locks. */
+	lock_print,	/* Print verbose current locking status. */
+	lock_disable,	/* Disable all locks. */
+	lock_enable,	/* Enable all locks (no permanent lockdown). */
+};
+
 /*
  * How many different contiguous runs of erase blocks with one size each do
  * we have for a given erase function?
@@ -229,6 +236,7 @@ 
 
 	int (*write) (struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf);
 	int (*read) (struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf, int start, int len);
+	int (*lock) (struct flashchip *flash, enum lockaction action);
 
 	/* Some flash devices have an additional register space. */
 	chipaddr virtual_memory;
@@ -558,6 +566,7 @@ 
 int spi_send_multicommand(struct spi_command *cmds);
 int spi_write_enable(void);
 int spi_write_disable(void);
+int spi_chip_lock(struct flashchip *flash, enum lockaction action);
 int spi_chip_erase_60(struct flashchip *flash);
 int spi_chip_erase_c7(struct flashchip *flash);
 int spi_chip_erase_60_c7(struct flashchip *flash);
@@ -668,6 +677,7 @@ 
 int probe_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash);
 int erase_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash);
 int write_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf);
+int lock_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash, enum lockaction action);
 
 /* sharplhf00l04.c */
 int probe_lhf00l04(struct flashchip *flash);
Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/pm49fl00x.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-lock_refactor/pm49fl00x.c	(Revision 769)
+++ flashrom-lock_refactor/pm49fl00x.c	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ 
  * Copyright (C) 2004 Tyan Corporation
  * Copyright (C) 2007 Nikolay Petukhov <nikolay.petukhov@gmail.com>
  * Copyright (C) 2007 Reinder E.N. de Haan <lb_reha@mveas.com>
+ * Copyright (C) 2009 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
  *
  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
@@ -36,6 +37,33 @@ 
 	}
 }
 
+/*
+ * Return 0 if successful, 1 if failed, 2 if unsupported.
+ */
+int lock_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash, enum lockaction action)
+{
+	switch (action) {
+	case lock_check_unlocked:
+		fprintf(stderr, "Checking lock status not supported.\n");
+		return 2;
+	case lock_print:
+		fprintf(stderr, "Printing lock status not supported.\n");
+		return 2;
+	case lock_disable:
+		write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers,
+				       flash->total_size * 1024, 0,
+				       flash->page_size);
+		return 0;
+	case lock_enable:
+		write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers,
+				       flash->total_size * 1024, 1,
+				       flash->page_size);
+		return 0;
+	default:
+		return 2;
+	}
+}
+
 int probe_49fl00x(struct flashchip *flash)
 {
 	int ret = probe_jedec(flash);
@@ -53,8 +81,7 @@ 
 	int page_size = flash->page_size;
 
 	/* unprotected */
-	write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers,
-			       total_size, 0, page_size);
+	lock_49fl00x(flash, lock_disable);
 
 	/*
 	 * erase_chip_jedec() will not work... Datasheet says
@@ -74,8 +101,7 @@ 
 	printf("\n");
 
 	/* protected */
-	write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers,
-			       total_size, 1, page_size);
+	lock_49fl00x(flash, lock_enable);
 
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -88,8 +114,7 @@ 
 	chipaddr bios = flash->virtual_memory;
 
 	/* unprotected */
-	write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers, total_size, 0,
-			       page_size);
+	lock_49fl00x(flash, lock_disable);
 
 	printf("Programming page: ");
 	for (i = 0; i < total_size / page_size; i++) {
@@ -109,8 +134,7 @@ 
 	printf("\n");
 
 	/* protected */
-	write_lockbits_49fl00x(flash->virtual_registers, total_size, 1,
-			       page_size);
+	lock_49fl00x(flash, lock_enable);
 
 	return 0;
 }
Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/flashchips.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-lock_refactor/flashchips.c	(Revision 769)
+++ flashrom-lock_refactor/flashchips.c	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ 
 	 * }
 	 * .write		= Chip write function
 	 * .read		= Chip read function
+	 * .lock		= Chip locking print/enable/disable function
 	 */
 
 	{
@@ -211,6 +212,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -227,6 +229,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -243,6 +246,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -259,6 +263,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -275,6 +280,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -291,6 +297,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -307,6 +314,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -323,6 +331,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -339,6 +348,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -355,6 +365,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -387,6 +398,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -403,6 +415,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -419,6 +432,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	/*The AT26DF321 has the same ID as the AT25DF321. */
@@ -436,6 +450,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	  },*/
 
 	{
@@ -468,7 +483,6 @@ 
 		.erase		= erase_chip_jedec,
 		.write		= write_jedec,
 		.read		= read_memmapped,
-
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -725,6 +739,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -789,6 +804,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= erase_49fl00x,
 		.write		= write_49fl00x,
 		.read		= read_memmapped,
+		.lock		= lock_49fl00x,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -821,6 +837,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -837,6 +854,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -853,6 +871,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -869,6 +888,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -885,6 +905,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -901,6 +922,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -917,6 +939,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -933,6 +956,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -949,6 +973,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -965,6 +990,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -981,6 +1007,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -997,6 +1024,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1013,6 +1041,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1029,6 +1058,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1045,6 +1075,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1061,6 +1092,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1256,6 +1288,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1288,6 +1321,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1323,6 +1357,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1358,6 +1393,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1393,6 +1429,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1428,6 +1465,7 @@ 
 		},
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1444,6 +1482,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1460,6 +1499,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1476,6 +1516,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1492,6 +1533,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1508,6 +1550,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1604,6 +1647,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1620,6 +1664,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1636,6 +1681,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1652,6 +1698,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1668,6 +1715,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1684,6 +1732,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1700,6 +1749,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1716,6 +1766,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1732,6 +1783,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1748,6 +1800,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1764,6 +1817,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1828,6 +1882,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= erase_49fl00x,
 		.write		= write_49fl00x,
 		.read		= read_memmapped,
+		.lock		= lock_49fl00x,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1844,6 +1899,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= erase_49fl00x,
 		.write		= write_49fl00x,
 		.read		= read_memmapped,
+		.lock		= lock_49fl00x,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1876,6 +1932,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1892,6 +1949,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1908,6 +1966,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1924,6 +1983,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1940,6 +2000,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1956,6 +2017,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -1972,6 +2034,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_60_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2420,6 +2483,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	/* The ST M25P05 is a bit of a problem. It has the same ID as the
@@ -2441,6 +2505,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1, /* 128 */
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2457,6 +2522,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	/* The ST M25P10 has the same problem as the M25P05. */
@@ -2474,6 +2540,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_1, /* 128 */
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2490,6 +2557,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2506,6 +2574,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2522,6 +2591,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2538,6 +2608,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2554,6 +2625,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2570,6 +2642,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2586,6 +2659,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2602,6 +2676,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2954,6 +3029,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2970,6 +3046,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -2986,6 +3063,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3002,6 +3080,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3018,6 +3097,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= spi_chip_erase_c7,
 		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
 		.read		= spi_chip_read,
+		.lock		= spi_chip_lock,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3258,6 +3338,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3274,6 +3355,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3290,6 +3372,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3306,6 +3389,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3322,6 +3406,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
@@ -3338,6 +3423,7 @@ 
 		.erase		= NULL,
 		.write		= NULL,
 		.read		= NULL,
+		.lock		= NULL,
 	},
 
 	{
Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c	(Revision 769)
+++ flashrom-lock_refactor/spi.c	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -30,8 +30,6 @@ 
 enum spi_controller spi_controller = SPI_CONTROLLER_NONE;
 void *spibar = NULL;
 
-void spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash);
-
 const struct spi_programmer spi_programmer[] = {
 	{ /* SPI_CONTROLLER_NONE */
 		.command = NULL,
@@ -268,11 +266,6 @@ 
 	printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%02x, id2 0x%02x\n", __func__, id1, id2);
 
 	if (id1 == flash->manufacture_id && id2 == flash->model_id) {
-		/* Print the status register to tell the
-		 * user about possible write protection.
-		 */
-		spi_prettyprint_status_register(flash);
-
 		return 1;
 	}
 
@@ -332,11 +325,6 @@ 
 	printf_debug("%s: id1 0x%x, id2 0x%x\n", __func__, id1, id2);
 
 	if (id1 == flash->manufacture_id && id2 == flash->model_id) {
-		/* Print the status register to tell the
-		 * user about possible write protection.
-		 */
-		spi_prettyprint_status_register(flash);
-
 		return 1;
 	}
 
@@ -373,10 +361,6 @@ 
 	if (id2 != flash->model_id)
 		return 0;
 
-	/* Print the status register to tell the
-	 * user about possible write protection.
-	 */
-	spi_prettyprint_status_register(flash);
 	return 1;
 }
 
@@ -467,39 +451,76 @@ 
 		bpt[(status & 0x1c) >> 2]);
 }
 
-void spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash)
+/*
+ * Return 0 if successful, 1 if failed, 2 if unsupported.
+ */
+int spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash)
 {
 	uint8_t status;
+	int result = 2;
 
 	status = spi_read_status_register();
 	printf_debug("Chip status register is %02x\n", status);
 	switch (flash->manufacture_id) {
 	case ST_ID:
 		if (((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000) ||
-		    ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2500))
+		    ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2500)) {
 			spi_prettyprint_status_register_st_m25p(status);
+			result = 0;
+		}
 		break;
 	case MX_ID:
-		if ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000)
+		if ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000) {
 			spi_prettyprint_status_register_st_m25p(status);
+			result = 0;
+		}
 		break;
 	case SST_ID:
 		switch (flash->model_id) {
 		case 0x2541:
 			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf016(status);
+			result = 0;
 			break;
 		case 0x8d:
 		case 0x258d:
 			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf040b(status);
+			result = 0;
 			break;
 		default:
 			spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25(status);
+			result = 0;
 			break;
 		}
 		break;
 	}
+
+	if (result == 2)
+		fprintf(stderr, "Printing lock status not supported.\n");
+	return result;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Return 0 if successful, 1 if failed, 2 if unsupported.
+ */
+int spi_chip_lock(struct flashchip *flash, enum lockaction action)
+{
+	switch (action) {
+	case lock_check_unlocked:
+		fprintf(stderr, "Checking lock status not supported.\n");
+		return 2;
+	case lock_print:
+		spi_prettyprint_status_register(flash);
+		return 0;
+	case lock_disable:
+		return spi_disable_blockprotect();
+	case lock_enable:
+		fprintf(stderr, "Lock enable not supported.\n");
+		return 2;
+	default:
+		return 2;
+	}
+}
+
 int spi_chip_erase_60(struct flashchip *flash)
 {
 	int result;
@@ -521,9 +542,9 @@ 
 		.readarr	= NULL,
 	}};
 	
-	result = spi_disable_blockprotect();
+	result = spi_chip_lock(flash, lock_disable);
 	if (result) {
-		fprintf(stderr, "spi_disable_blockprotect failed\n");
+		fprintf(stderr, "unprotect failed\n");
 		return result;
 	}
 	
@@ -567,9 +588,9 @@ 
 		.readarr	= NULL,
 	}};
 
-	result = spi_disable_blockprotect();
+	result = spi_chip_lock(flash, lock_disable);
 	if (result) {
-		fprintf(stderr, "spi_disable_blockprotect failed\n");
+		fprintf(stderr, "unprotect failed\n");
 		return result;
 	}
 
@@ -687,17 +708,21 @@ 
 
 int spi_chip_erase_d8(struct flashchip *flash)
 {
-	int i, rc = 0;
+	int i, result = 0;
 	int total_size = flash->total_size * 1024;
 	int erase_size = 64 * 1024;
 
-	spi_disable_blockprotect();
+	result = spi_chip_lock(flash, lock_disable);
+	if (result) {
+		fprintf(stderr, "unprotect failed\n");
+		return result;
+	}
 
 	printf("Erasing chip: \n");
 
 	for (i = 0; i < total_size / erase_size; i++) {
-		rc = spi_block_erase_d8(flash, i * erase_size, erase_size);
-		if (rc) {
+		result = spi_block_erase_d8(flash, i * erase_size, erase_size);
+		if (result) {
 			fprintf(stderr, "Error erasing block at 0x%x\n", i);
 			break;
 		}
@@ -705,7 +730,7 @@ 
 
 	printf("\n");
 
-	return rc;
+	return result;
 }
 
 /* Sector size is usually 4k, though Macronix eliteflash has 64k */
@@ -983,7 +1008,11 @@ 
 	int total_size = 1024 * flash->total_size;
 	int i, result = 0;
 
-	spi_disable_blockprotect();
+	result = spi_chip_lock(flash, lock_disable);
+	if (result) {
+		fprintf(stderr, "unprotect failed\n");
+		return result;
+	}
 	/* Erase first */
 	printf("Erasing flash before programming... ");
 	if (erase_flash(flash)) {
Index: flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c	(Revision 769)
+++ flashrom-lock_refactor/flashrom.c	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -509,6 +509,26 @@ 
 	printf("Found chip \"%s %s\" (%d KB, %s) at physical address 0x%lx.\n",
 	       flash->vendor, flash->name, flash->total_size,
 	       flashbuses_to_text(flash->bustype), base);
+	/* Print the locking status. */
+	if (flash->lock) {
+		flash->lock(flash, lock_print);
+		switch (flash->lock(flash, lock_check_unlocked)) {
+		case 0:
+			printf_debug("Chip is completely unlocked or does not "
+				     "support locking.");
+			break;
+		case 1:
+			printf_debug("Chip is partially/completely locked.\n");
+			break;
+		case 2:
+			printf_debug("Chip locking status could not be "
+				     "determined.\n");
+			break;
+		}
+	} else {
+		printf_debug("This chip has not been converted to the new chip "
+			     "locking infrastructure yet.\n");
+	}
 
 	return flash;
 }