> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 05:41:41PM +0200, Mondrian Nuessle wrote:
>>
>>> Provide linuxbios name and only main ids and the matcher will not try to
>>> match on pci-ids.
>> Yes, that's what I'll do.
>> What about putting a warning message in the code whenever no matching
>> board could be found. Ju
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 05:41:41PM +0200, Mondrian Nuessle wrote:
>
>
> >Provide linuxbios name and only main ids and the matcher will not try to
> >match on pci-ids.
>
> Yes, that's what I'll do.
> What about putting a warning message in the code whenever no matching
> board could be found. Jus
>Provide linuxbios name and only main ids and the matcher will not try to
>match on pci-ids.
Yes, that's what I'll do.
What about putting a warning message in the code whenever no matching
board could be found. Just to be safe :-)
Regards,
Mondrian
--
Mondrian Nuessle Univers
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 03:04:40PM +0200, Mondrian Nuessle wrote:
> Yes, when I looked around for good pci vendor/device ids respectively
> subsystem ids, I got the impression that are no unambiguous ids.
>
> Identification works perfectly once LinuxBIOS is booted using the
> LinuxBios supplied ve
Yes, when I looked around for good pci vendor/device ids respectively
subsystem ids, I got the impression that are no unambiguous ids.
Identification works perfectly once LinuxBIOS is booted using the
LinuxBios supplied vendor/part.
My suggestion then would be to remove matching of the board base
No. I must add this option on my machine for LinuxBIOS v2587. Without
it, flashrom can't get the vendor and part name of my mainboard.
Mandrian, do you have the same problem?
Ning
On 4/25/07, Peter Stuge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:22:44PM -0400, Ning (Michael) Qu wro
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:22:44PM -0400, Ning (Michael) Qu wrote:
> I found that I have a different ID for the ISA bridge, so the only
> difference between our codes is the device id from 0x746b to
> 0x7468.
>
> { 0x1022, 0x7468, 0x1022, 0x7468, 0x, 0x, 0x, 0x,
> "iwill", "dk
> I found that I have a different ID for the ISA bridge, so the only
> difference between our codes is the device id from 0x746b to 0x7468.
7468 is the LPC bridge, 746b is the SM function.
Both of these contain bits related to flash
operation.
Segher
--
linuxbios mailing list
linuxbios@linuxb
Hi
I found that I have a different ID for the ISA bridge, so the only
difference between our codes is the device id from 0x746b to 0x7468.
{ 0x1022, 0x7468, 0x1022, 0x7468, 0x, 0x, 0x, 0x,
"iwill", "dk8_htx", "IWILL DK8-HTX", board_iwill_dk8htx },
Best,
N
Hi, Mondrian,
Thanks very much! I works now! I found that the function has not been
called before I did some modifications:
1 add a option to the flashrom command line, such as:
-m iwill:dk8_htx
2 I comment the pci device search in the board_match_linuxbios_name
function because it seems that I
Hi, Mondrian,
Unfortunately, after patching flashrom, the results remain the same as
before. Only the page 7 is programmed. I guess I should first check
the WP pin of Savior, and then perhaps I need this patch to program
it. Thanks for your help!
Best,
Ning
On 4/25/07, Mondrian Nuessle <[EMAIL P
Hi,Mondrian
Thats great! I will search for your posts. Thank you very much!
Best,
Ning
On 4/25/07, Mondrian Nuessle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
> You need to enable writing to the flash. In case of the Iwill board,
> some SuperIO GPIOs need to be properly set.
> I sent an email to the list
Hi!
You need to enable writing to the flash. In case of the Iwill board,
some SuperIO GPIOs need to be properly set.
I sent an email to the list with a patch attached, which configures
flashrom to handle the iwill dk8_htx correctly.
Regards,
Mondrian
--
Mondrian Nuessle Universi
Hi,
The chip on the motherboard is
AMD-8111 HyperTransport™ I/O Hub
• AMD-8131 HyperTransport™ PCI-X 1.0 Tunnel
• Super I/O: Winbond W83627HF-AW
and the mainboard spec is here:
http://www.iwillusa.com/product_2.asp?p_id=98
Sorry about that I didn't state it clearly before.
> The content of all the other pages are 0xff. And I can't erase the
> whole flash chip by -E option. And the last page keep the content I
> programmed into.
The contents are 0xff _before_ you ever tried to program
the device? That means you cannot access those pages at
all.
Typically, on x86 sy
The content of all the other pages are 0xff. And I can't erase the
whole flash chip by -E option. And the last page keep the content I
programmed into.
Peter suggests me that it may be because of WP pin (hardware
protection), but I ca't easily access that pin because of the flash
chip is embedded
> And I check the new content after programming Savior. Only the last
> page are programmed. The total is 8 pages (512K), and only the content
> from 0x7 is correctly programmed. What's the problem? Is there
> something wrong with flashrom?
What happened to the other pages -- did they retain
t
Hi,
Thanks very much for your reply! I will check the status of WP pin.
But because the flash chip is embedded in the middle of Savior,
perhaps I can't see it clearly. And I haven't tried to flash a chip
directly on the mainboard because I won't take the risk of failing to
booting the system .
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:42:29PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> * Ning (Michael) Qu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070424 21:30]:
> > And I check the new content after programming Savior. Only the
> > last page are programmed. The total is 8 pages (512K), and only
> > the content from 0x7 is correctly
I just checked the datasheet and don't find anything strange.
Furthermore, I find these old threads but it seems that there is no
solution for this problem.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bios/18061/focus=18153
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bios/20985
Any more suggestions about my prob
Thanks! I will check the datasheet of that flashrom and update the status of it.
On 4/24/07, Stefan Reinauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Ning (Michael) Qu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070424 21:30]:
> > And I check the new content after programming Savior. Only the last
> > page are programmed. The tot
* Ning (Michael) Qu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070424 21:30]:
> And I check the new content after programming Savior. Only the last
> page are programmed. The total is 8 pages (512K), and only the content
> from 0x7 is correctly programmed. What's the problem? Is there
> something wrong with flashrom
And I check the new content after programming Savior. Only the last
page are programmed. The total is 8 pages (512K), and only the content
from 0x7 is correctly programmed. What's the problem? Is there
something wrong with flashrom?
On 4/24/07, Ning (Michael) Qu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
23 matches
Mail list logo
