On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:51:29AM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > Switch SST49LF004A/B to block erase, remove the hack which simulated > (unsupported) chip erase. > Annotate SST49LF004B quirks for TBL#. > > Add TEST_OK_PRW which is useful when a PREW chip gets a new erase routine. > > Change a few erase function prototypes to use unsigned int instead of int. > > Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> >
> + /* Contrary to the data sheet, TBL# on the SST49LF004B affects > the top 128kB (instead of 64kB) > + * and is only honored for 64k block erase, but not 4k sector > erase. > + */ > .vendor = "SST", > .name = "SST49LF004A/B", > .bustype = CHIP_BUSTYPE_FWH, /* A/A Mux */ > @@ -2148,10 +2151,23 @@ > .model_id = SST_49LF004A, > .total_size = 512, > .page_size = 64 * 1024, > - .tested = TEST_OK_PREW, > + .tested = TEST_OK_PRW, Can we not consider E as tested here? I believe you got ulf to test both, and with the board enable, even the 64k block erase succeeded. Luc Verhaegen. _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
