[coreboot] Re: beginner's despair ;) coreboot update via internal fails

2020-05-11 Thread Angel Pons
Hi, On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 7:13 PM Nico Huber wrote: > > Hi, > > On 07.05.20 18:11, Felix Held wrote: > > I'd say that flashrom only verifying the section it writes by default > > would be less surprising behavior than the current behavior. > > we'd need a distinction between reliable and unrelia

[coreboot] Re: beginner's despair ;) coreboot update via internal fails

2020-05-07 Thread Nico Huber
Hi, On 07.05.20 18:11, Felix Held wrote: > I'd say that flashrom only verifying the section it writes by default > would be less surprising behavior than the current behavior. we'd need a distinction between reliable and unreliable programmers first. Because not verifying everything with the latt

[coreboot] Re: beginner's despair ;) coreboot update via internal fails

2020-05-07 Thread Felix Held
Hi! I'd say that flashrom only verifying the section it writes by default would be less surprising behavior than the current behavior. Regards Felix ___ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@cor

[coreboot] Re: beginner's despair ;) coreboot update via internal fails

2020-05-07 Thread Michal Zygowski
Hi JPT, The --no-verify-all option is useful when you are flashing an image on Intel platform that has ME and IFD regions locked/read-only. Even if using --ifd -i bios, flashrom will verify whole image against the binary file you passed to flashrom. --no-verify-all option tells flashrom "please ve

[coreboot] Re: beginner's despair ;) coreboot update via internal fails

2020-05-07 Thread JPT
Solved it already. added --noverify-all this sounds dangerous but it just doesn't verify the areas it did't write. o.O Am 07.05.20 um 16:43 schrieb JPT: > Hi, > > I want to contribute to the board status database. > For this I did a build from 4.11 branch. > > This is flashing from the OS for th