Committed revision 1911.

On May 25, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Raúl Sánchez Siles wrote:

 Hello:

On Friday 22 May 2009 20:16:14 Michael Schwingen wrote:
Raúl Sánchez Siles wrote:
 Hello all:

This start a patchset series for implementing x16_as_x8 cfi compliant
feature.

 · 01-x16_as_x8-consolidate_addresses.patch
 · 02-x16_as_x8-flash_address.patch
 · 03-x16_as_x8-multibyte_read.patch

I have taken a view to the CFI specification [0] and it looks that the approach should also work for intel chips, while I had only tested it
with spansion flash.

That looks good to me - I would have expected a lot more changes.

Some style comments:
- I do not really like left shifts with what is effectively a bool
variable as shift amount ("bank->bus_width << cfi_info- >x16_as_x8"). The
logic is correct, but it looks strange.


For this point I propose the attached patch. In case it is decided to be
applied consider the commit message:

"cfi flash_address coding style fix."

 HTH,

--
Raúl Sánchez Siles

Departamento de Montaje

INFOGLOBAL, S. A.

* C/ Virgilio, 2. Ciudad de la Imagen.
28223 Pozuelo de Alarcón (Madrid), España
* T: +34 91 506 40 00
* F: +34 91 506 40 01


<01_cfi- correct_bool_shift.txt>_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

--
Rick Altherr
[email protected]

"He said he hadn't had a byte in three days. I had a short, so I split it with him."
 -- Unsigned



Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to