On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:03:00 +0100 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 15.02.2012 14:11 schrieb Stefan Tauner: > > On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:55:38 +0100 > > Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Now if something is outside the scope of > >> flashrom, should flashrom care at all? > > depends... i dont think of "the scope" as a clearly bounded area. > > everything related to flash chips is somewhat in its scope (else we > > would not talk about this), heck we even discussed EEPROM handling > > multiple times... we dont need to support any and all feature found in > > any flash chip out there, but we should integrate knowledge and code > > for the more common ones that might be useful, if there is someone > > willing to provide them (and maintain them if necessary). > > If we target non-flash EEPROMs, we might as well support OTP. I'd say > such support is post-1.0 material, though (and no, I don't plan to delay > flashrom 1.0 like Wine 1.0 was delayed). no, you will tell us that you may tag 1.0 next week - every week :P > >> Do we warn if a chip has a readonly serial number? That means the chip > >> can't be cloned. People who care about OTP for clonability reasons > >> probably care about other readonly contents as well. OTOH, other people > >> who don't use the OTP at all (for them, OTP is just an accidental > >> feature of a cheap flash chip) don't want to be bothered by yet another > >> line of output from flashrom which has no relevancy for them. > > do you agree to lowering the verbosity of the whole message to dbg > > level? > > Yes. done and committed in r1493, one less yay! -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
