I took the original patch from Ondrej Hennel [1] and applied the
requested changes. Reading, erasing and writing works.
[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/flashrom/list/?series=261647
Change-Id: Iffd7c4284d4d96b30a94f5dee882b5403fdfc183
Signed-off-by: Mario Kicherer <dev@kicherer.org>
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/68295
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Tested read/write/erase/probe operations with a ch341a_spi programmer.
Datasheet is available at https://www.mouser.de/datasheet/2/590/DS-AT25DF011_032-1098683.pdf
Signed-off-by: Hanno Heinrichs <hanno.heinrichs@rwth-aachen.de>
Change-Id: I5a2141f1380e864c843d6a3008fdb02dc1b75131
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/51048
Reviewed-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
See https://www.mxic.com.tw/Lists/Datasheet/Attachments/8662/MX25V1635F,%202.5V,%2016Mb,%20v1.4.pdf .
I've tested this patch with the MX25V1635F I have here, using serprog
and ftdi by (re)writing a few images to the flash and seeing if changes
were stored correctly. This also included erasing and rewriting the
memory with completely different data, so erase is tested, too.
Change-Id: I58ddaaa96ef410d50dde3aaa20376c5bbf0f370b
Signed-off-by: PoroCYon <p@pcy.be>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/73824
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
See https://www.macronix.com/Lists/Datasheet/Attachments/8405/MX25V8035F,%202.5V,%208Mb,%20v1.0.pdf .
I've only tested this patch with the MX25V1635F I have here, though
other chips in the series exist as well. Tested using serprog and ftdi
by writing a few images to the flash and seeing if changes were stored
correctly.
Change-Id: Ic5be2da4cfa2a2ff044a519bb6f367f21c15e4b8
Signed-off-by: PoroCYon <p@pcy.be>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/73823
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
See https://www.macronix.com/Lists/Datasheet/Attachments/8670/MX25V4035F,%202.5V,%204Mb,%20v1.2.pdf .
I've only tested this patch with the MX25V1635F I have here, though
other chips in the series exist as well. Tested using serprog and ftdi
by writing a few images to the flash and seeing if changes were stored
correctly.
Change-Id: I8b26926c354b840ca7b14b4c5cb000e3c02f5137
Signed-off-by: PoroCYon <p@pcy.be>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/73582
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
These chips seem to be rather regular, supporting 2.7V..3.6V, the
common erase block sizes 4KiB, 32KiB, 64KiB and the usual block-
protection bits.
Status/configuration register naming differs from other vendors,
though. These chips have 2 status registers plus 3 configuration
registers. Configuration registers 1 & 2 match status registers
2 & 3 of what we are used from other vendors. Read opcodes match
too, however writes are always done through the WRSR instruction
which can write up to 4 bytes (SR1, CR1, CR2, CR3).
S25FL256L supports native 4BA commands and entering a 4BA mode.
However, it uses an unusual opcode (0x53) for the 32KiB 4BA block
erase.
Signed-off-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Change-Id: I356df6649f29e50879a4da4183f1164a81cb0a09
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/64747
Reviewed-by: Thomas Heijligen <src@posteo.de>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Add Winbond W25Q512NW-IM chip ID and specs to flashrom.
BUG=b:200173901
BRANCH=none
TEST=flash W25Q512NW-IM using CCD.
Original-Change-Id: I9debeda01d77444a5ebe9808ff80a337f320ef65
Original-Signed-off-by: Atul Dhudase <adhudase@codeaurora.org>
Original-Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/flashrom/+/3171890
Original-Reviewed-by: Shelley Chen <shchen@chromium.org>
Original-Reviewed-by: Vadim Bendebury <vbendeb@chromium.org>
Original-Tested-by: Shelley Chen <shchen@chromium.org>
Original-Commit-Queue: Shelley Chen <shchen@chromium.org>
(cherry picked from commit facb282e8939b8e4ad15d2478ed9ef86d98aed61)
Note: this commit was cherry-picked from the cros tree but
includes corrections to errors in the original commit's 4BA
feature flags that were spotted by Angel Pons
Change-Id: I9debeda01d77444a5ebe9808ff80a337f320ef65
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/64405
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Move all header files to the new `include` directory.
Adapt include directives and build systems to the new directory.
Change-Id: Iaddd6bbfa0624b166d422f665877f096983bf4cf
Signed-off-by: Felix Singer <felix.singer@secunet.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Heijligen <thomas.heijligen@secunet.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58622
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
