Hi, On 08.05.2009 01:05, [email protected] wrote: > This might work, but, if I can say, I don't like the idea of renaming the > ich_spi_write to ich_spi_write_256. > > 1) ich_spi_write() looks to be the generic one, then, this one has the good > name. >
The big problem is that the standard says something about 1-byte writes being the default. Many vendors extended that to 256-byte writes (or 16 or even full-chip), depending on the exact flash chip model. > 2) ich_spi_write() should already use something, stored in the relevant > flashchips[] item, to perform byte, page sector or block write operations. If > we > come to make it more "generic", all will have to be renamed back again. > Indeed. We should add more info to struct flashchip. Realistically, that will only happen after my dozen pending flashrom patches (cleanup, bugfixes and architecture iprovements) are merged. Regards, Carl-Daniel > Selon Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]>: > > >> Chips like the SST SST25VF080B can only handle single byte writes >> outside AAI mode. >> >> Change SPI architecture to handle 1-byte chunk chip writing differently >> from 256-byte chunk chip writing. >> >> Convert all flashchips.c entries with SPI programing to the 256-byte >> version by default. >> >> Change the flashchips entry for SST SST25VF080B to 1-byte writing. >> -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
