Am 01.06.2014 02:27 schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:
> Found this bitrotting away on my disk. Rebased from r1645, last time all
> snippets compiled was r1539. If you kill the cli_classic.c hunk, it
> should compile. That hunk was in the patch to make sure the msg_gspew()
> calls in selfcheck() aren't no-ops by default. Hm. This seems to be a
> bug still in HEAD.
>
> Not for direct merge, there are other random changes in there as well.
> Stefan, you already wrote a patch doing a board enable array selfcheck,
> and AFAICS yours checks some more bits.
> AFAICS the most interesting point in this patch are the verbose
> messages/comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]>
selfcheck_board_enables() needs an additional bugfix to compile. See below.
Sorry.
> Index: flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/cli_classic.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/cli_classic.c (Revision 1806)
> +++ flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/cli_classic.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -139,8 +139,10 @@
> print_version();
> print_banner();
>
> + verbose = 2;
> if (selfcheck())
> exit(1);
> + verbose = 0;
>
> setbuf(stdout, NULL);
> /* FIXME: Delay all operation_specified checks until after command
> Index: flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/flashrom.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/flashrom.c (Revision 1806)
> +++ flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/flashrom.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -1303,6 +1303,10 @@
> eraser.eraseblocks[i].size;
> }
> /* Empty eraseblock definition with erase function. */
> + /* FIXME: This message will never trigger because spew and debug
> + * messages are not printed at this stage before debug variable
> + * initialization.
> + */
> if (!done && eraser.block_erase)
> msg_gspew("Strange: Empty eraseblock definition with "
> "non-empty erase function. Not an error.\n");
> @@ -1768,7 +1772,11 @@
> ret = 1;
> }
> }
> + ret = 1;
> }
> + if (selfcheck_boardenables()) {
> + msg_gerr("Board enable self check failed!\n");
> + }
>
> /* TODO: implement similar sanity checks for other arrays where deemed
> necessary. */
> return ret;
> Index: flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/programmer.h
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/programmer.h (Revision 1806)
> +++ flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/programmer.h (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -263,6 +263,7 @@
> uint8_t sio_read(uint16_t port, uint8_t reg);
> void sio_write(uint16_t port, uint8_t reg, uint8_t data);
> void sio_mask(uint16_t port, uint8_t reg, uint8_t data, uint8_t mask);
> +int selfcheck_boardenables(void);
> void board_handle_before_superio(void);
> void board_handle_before_laptop(void);
> int board_flash_enable(const char *vendor, const char *model, const char
> *cb_vendor, const char *cb_model);
> Index: flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/board_enable.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/board_enable.c (Revision 1806)
> +++ flashrom-boardenable_selfcheck/board_enable.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -2532,9 +2532,72 @@
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +int selfcheck_boardenables(void)
> +{
> + struct board_pciid_enable *board = board_pciid_enables;
Sorry. This should have been
struct board_match *board = board_matches;
> + int ret = 0;
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (; board->vendor_name; board++) {
> + if (!board->first_vendor) {
> + /* This would only be valid for boards which don't have
> + * any onboard PCI devices at all.
> + */
> + msg_gerr("Zero first vendor in position %i "
> + "of the board enable table\n", i);
> + ret = 1;
> + }
> + if (!board->first_device) {
> + /* This would only be valid for boards which don't have
> + * any onboard PCI devices at all.
> + */
> + msg_gerr("Zero first device in position %i "
> + "of the board enable table\n", i);
> + ret = 1;
> + }
> + if (!board->board_name) {
> + /* A nameless board in the list is a maintenance
> + * nightmare.
> + */
> + msg_gerr("Missing board name in position %i "
> + "of the board enable table\n", i);
> + ret = 1;
> + }
> + if (!board->first_card_vendor && !board->dmi_pattern) {
> + msg_gerr("Zero first subsystem vendor and no DMI "
> + "pattern in position %i of the board enable "
> + "table\n", i);
> + ret = 1;
> + }
> + if (!board->first_card_device && !board->dmi_pattern) {
> + msg_gerr("Zero first subsystem device and no DMI "
> + "pattern in position %i of the board enable "
> + "table\n", i);
> + ret = 1;
> + }
> + if (!board->first_card_vendor && board->dmi_pattern) {
> + /* Such boards are usually really old. No error. */
> + msg_gspew("Zero first subsystem vendor but with DMI
> pattern in position %i "
> + "of the board enable table\n", i);
> + }
> + if (!board->first_card_device && board->dmi_pattern) {
> + /* Such boards are usually really old. No error. */
> + msg_gspew("Zero first subsystem device but with DMI
> pattern in position %i "
> + "of the board enable table\n", i);
> + }
> +
> + i++;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Match boards on PCI IDs and subsystem IDs.
> * Second set of IDs can be either main+subsystem IDs, main IDs or no IDs.
> + *
> + * Logic of this function: First PCI dev has to match ven/dev/subven/subdev.
> + * The second PCI dev is completely optional (bad idea).
> */
> const static struct board_match *board_match_pci_ids(enum board_match_phase
> phase)
> {
>
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
_______________________________________________
flashrom mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
