On 16.11.2008 06:17, Peter Stuge wrote: > Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > >>> All unknown SPI chips claim to have status UNTESTED for >>> probe/read/erase/write. That's incorrect. Since the chips are unknown, >>> read/erase/write are unavailable for them. And if probe worked, they >>> wouldn't have needed the generic vendor match in the first place. Mark >>> those chips as BAD for probe/read/erase/write. >>> >>> That change revealed another bug: >>> If a chip has any TEST_BAD_* flag set, we don't even list the >>> unsupported functions, giving the user the impression that the >>> unsupported functions are tested. >>> Fix that bug as well. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >> Thanks to Uwe for testing and finding a bug. >> > > Nak. > > Unknown chips can not be tested and known to be bad, which is what > TEST_BAD_ means. > > If anything, please remove the unknown chips. > > > The TEST_BAD_ logic improvement is good, but I would like it to > explicitly test each flag instead of assuming that TEST_OK_ and > TEST_BAD_ flags will overlap. That may not always be the case. Also > the _SHIFT define isn't so nice imo. Fix those and that part is: > > Acked-by: Peter Stuge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
Thanks, r3780. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
