As a consecuence, some of the files that used to include flash.h no
longer need to do so. For this reason, flash.h includes are also deleted
in this commit.
Change-Id: I794a71536a3b85fde39f83c802fa0f5dd8d428e0
Signed-off-by: Antonio Vázquez Blanco <antoniovazquezblanco@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/85539
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: David Reguera Garcia (Dreg) <regueragarciadavid@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Matti Finder <matti.finder@gmail.com>
If hardware protection is requested but not supported by the flash
chip, return an error code indicating that the protection mode is
unsupported, rather than indicating that all WP features are unsupported.
TEST=ninja test
Change-Id: I29e9069c7781fbb238f30aa9a9285b692b0c7200
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/84826
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Add a new wp_cfg_to_reg_values() function that takes a generic wp_cfg
instance and returns the chip-specific values that need to be written to
the chip's registers to enable the specified protection range/mode.
The function returns three values for each chip register:
- reg_values[reg] - Value writeprotect will write to reg
- bit_masks[reg] - Bit mask for WP-related bits in reg
- write_masks[reg] - Bit mask for writable WP-related bits in reg
(i.e. the ones writeprotect will try to write)
BUG=b:260019525,b:259013033,260020006
BRANCH=none
TEST=ninja test
Change-Id: Ib2a47153b230c9f82bb4eca357c335f2abbacc20
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69847
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Make the spi25 register read/write functions return SPI_INVALID_OPCODE
if the programmer blocks the read/write opcode for the register.
Likewise, make ichspi read/write register functions return
SPI_INVALID_OPCODE for registers >SR1 as they cannot be accessd.
Make writeprotect ignore SPI_INVALID_OPCODE unless it is trying to
read/write SR1, which should always be supported.
BUG=b:253715389,b:253713774,b:240229722
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-{enable,disable,range,list,status} on dedede
Change-Id: I2145749dcc51f4556550650dab5aa1049f879c45
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69129
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Extract the code that converts `struct wp_bits` into a collection of
register values and bit masks out of `write_wp_bits()` into a new
function.
This avoids monadic transformer stacks where unit-testing cannot
penetrate well to give suitable coverage, therefore keep the bit
logic in a separate pure function.
BUG=b:260019525,b:259013033
BRANCH=none
TEST=ninja test
TEST=flashrom --wp-{{dis,en}able,range,list,status} on dedede
Change-Id: I604478ecbb70392c5584bf5d87c76b6f20f882b1
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69846
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Not all chips follow the same pattern. There are differences in how CMP
bit is treated or in block size used.
Change-Id: Ied7b27be2ee2426af8f473432e2b01a290de2365
Signed-off-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66212
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Perform the check right in read_wp_bits() as it's used by various WP
operations and also because its results won't make sense if WPS bit is
on and can't be changed.
Change-Id: I143186066a1d3af89809b7135886cb8b0d038085
Signed-off-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66836
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
* Don't write register because of RO and OTP bits.
* Skip the write of RW bits if register state wouldn't change by it.
Change-Id: I81d2d3fc0a103ee00ced78838d77fe33a9d3056a
Signed-off-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66754
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Replace the `decode_range` function pointer in `struct flashchip` to an
enum value. The enum value can be used to find the corresponding
function pointer by passing it to `lookup_decode_range_func_ptr()`.
Removing function pointers like `decode_range` makes it possible to represent chip data in a declarative format that does not have to be
stored as C source code.
BUG=b:242479049
BRANCH=none
TEST=ninja && ninja test
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Change-Id: If6d08d414d3d1ddadc95ca1d407fc87c23ab543d
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/67195
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Allow specialisation in opaque masters, such as ichspi hwseq, to
write to status registers.
Also update the dispatch logic in libflashrom to call wp code when
status register access functions are provided by an opaque master.
BUG=none
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-status on AMD and Intel DUTs
Change-Id: I3ab0d7f5f48338c8ecb118a69651c203fbc516ac
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Co-Authored-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/64375
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
The doxygen documentation was in the libflashrom.c file. Move the
documentation to the libflashrom.h file. This allows foreign function
interface binding generators (eg rust bindgen) that operate on the .h
file to generate documentation for the target language. Some doxygen
errors were also corrected, mostly undocumented or wrongly labeled
parameters.
To test, I have diffed and inspected the doxygen documentation before
and after the change. All functions are documented the same, and the
structs and enums are now also included in the docs.
Change-Id: I856b74d5bfea13722539be15496755a95e701eea
Signed-off-by: Evan Benn <evanbenn@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/63903
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
WPS bit controls use of individual block protection which is mutually
exclusive with protection based on ranges. Proper support requires
extension of the API as well as implementation, so here we're just
making sure that range-based protection is enabled and our WP
configuration is not ignored by the chip.
Change-Id: I2c26ec65d64a3b6fb1f1a73690bc771415db2744
Signed-off-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/60231
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
This is a follow up on commit 12dbc4e04508aecfff53ad95b6f68865da1b4f07.
Use a lookup table in get_wp_mode() and drop the srp_bit_present check,
since a chip without SRP is just FLASHROM_WP_MODE_DISABLED.
Add a srp_bit_present check to set_wp_mode() if the mode requires it.
BUG=b:182223106
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-{enable,disable,status} on AMD dut
Change-Id: Ib6c347453f9216e5816e4ed35bf9783fd3c720e0
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/62643
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Generate list of available ranges by enumerating all possible values
that range bits (BPx, TB, ...) can take and using the chip's range
decoding function to get the range that is selected by each one.
BUG=b:195381327,b:153800563
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-list
Change-Id: Id51f038f03305c8536d80313e52f77d27835f34d
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58481
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
BUG=b:195381327,b:153800563
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-{status,range} at end of patch series
Change-Id: I5a1dfcf384166b1bac319d286306747e1dcaa000
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/59183
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
New functions are exposed through the libflashrom API for
reading/writing chip's WP settins: `flashrom_wp_{read,write}_cfg()`.
They read/write an opaque `struct flashrom_wp_cfg` instance, which
includes the flash protection range and status register protection mode.
This commit also adds `{read,write}_wp_bits()` helper functions that
read/write chip-specific WP configuration bits.
BUG=b:195381327,b:153800563
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom --wp-{enable,disable,range,list,status} at end of patch series
Change-Id: I3ad25708c3321b8fb0216c3eaf6ffc07616537ad
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58479
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Delete writeprotect code that was previously extracted from the cros tree.
This is the first of a series of commits adding writeprotect support.
Following commits incrementally implement writeprotect operations,
culminating in writeprotect support for three example chips: GD25LQ128,
GD25Q32, and GD25Q256.
BUG=b:195381327,b:153800563
BRANCH=none
TEST=flashrom -{r,w,E}
TEST=flashrom --wp-{enable,disable,range,list,status} at end of patch series
Change-Id: I67e9b31f86465e5a8f7d3def637198671ee818a8
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58474
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
The following just lays out the structure for write protect
manipulation of SPI flash chips in Flashrom. We later follow
up with adding support for each manufacturer group.
BUG=b:153800563
BRANCH=none
TEST=builds
Change-Id: Id93b5a1cb2da476fa8a7dde41d7b963024117474
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/40325
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
