On 30.11.2009 12:01, David Bartley wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > >> Could you please add a Signed-off-by: statement to your patch? >> > Done. >
Thanks. >> On 30.11.2009 10:19, David Bartley wrote: >>> On a related note, reading the flash back seems slightly broken; >>> sometimes the read gets a few bytes wrong. >> >> This is very interesting. If you read a few times (without >> writing/erasing in between), do the results change? If not, this points >> to an error during writing and we should make sure that this is fixed. >> An error during reading is much more difficult to diagnose. Please note >> that latest flashrom (0.9.1-r790) has some improved write checks and >> should detect write errors better. If you see a pattern in the broken >> addresses (e.g. always the same, wandering by x bytes, common prefix, >> common suffix), please tell us about it as well. >> > > I noticed this before I had erase/write working and can reproduce this > if I reboot and try reading. I can no longer reproduce this after > flashing though. > Ah, that. Many BIOSes out there change a few bytes in the ROM on each boot. They store boot date/time and some configuration data. Such changes are expected. As long as the readback doesn't change between subsequent reads (without any boot in between), you're in the clear. I think the flashrom wiki had some statement about this in the Random notes section. Please note that the wiki search on flashrom.org is non-functional right now. Hm. http://www.flashrom.org/Random_notes doesn't have this info. Idwer/Maciej, can one of you please add this info to the random notes page? Thanks. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- Developer quote of the month: "We are juggling too many chainsaws and flaming arrows and tigers." _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
