Original progress reporting implemented in CB:49643 and it has some
issues, for example:
size_t start_address = start;
size_t end_address = len - start;
End address is anything but length minus start address.
update_progress(flash,
FLASHROM_PROGRESS_READ,
/*current*/ start - start_address + to_read,
/*total*/ end_address);
Total should just be length if that's how current value is computed.
---
libflashrom needs to know total size ahead of time.
That's init_progress() and changed update_progress().
It also needs to store the last current value to be able to update it.
That's stage_progress in flashrom_flashctx.
Measuring accurately amount of data which will be read/erased/written
isn't easy because things can be skipped as optimizations. The next
patch in the chain aims to address this, there are TODO/FIXME
comments there.
---
CLI shares terminal with the rest of the code and has to maintain more
state to handle that reasonably well.
Similar to CB:64668, an effort is made to keep the progress on a
single line. Non-progress output is kept track of to know when
moving to a new line cannot be avoided.
---
A script to test the CLI:
\#!/bin/bash
t=${1:-rewW}
shift
if [[ $t =~ r ]]; then
echo ">>> READ"
./flashrom -p dummy:emulate=W25Q128FV,freq=64mhz -r dump.rom --progress "$@"
echo
fi
if [[ $t =~ e ]]; then
echo ">>> ERASE"
./flashrom -p dummy:emulate=W25Q128FV,freq=64mhz -E --progress "$@"
echo
fi
if [[ $t =~ w ]]; then
echo ">>> WRITE (without erase)"
dd if=/dev/zero of=zero.rom bs=1M count=16 2> /dev/null
./flashrom -p dummy:emulate=W25Q128FV,freq=64mhz -w zero.rom --progress "$@"
echo
fi
if [[ $t =~ W ]]; then
echo ">>> WRITE (with erase)"
dd if=/dev/zero of=zero.rom bs=1M count=16 2> /dev/null
dd if=/dev/random of=random.rom bs=1M count=16 2> /dev/null
./flashrom -p dummy:emulate=W25Q128FV,freq=64mhz,image=random.rom -w zero.rom --progress "$@"
echo
fi
Co-developed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Co-developed-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Change-Id: If1e40fc97f443c4f0c0501cef11cff1f3f84c051
Signed-off-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/84102
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
This forges the way for flashchips.c to be pure declarative
data and lookup functions for dispatch to be pure. This
means that the flashchips data could be extracted out to
be agnostic data of the flashrom code and algorithms.
TEST='R|W|E && --flash-name' on ARM, AMD & Intel DUT's.
Change-Id: I80149de169464b204fb09f1424a86fc645b740fd
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66782
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
This forges the way for flashchips.c to be pure declarative
data and lookup functions for dispatch to be pure. This
means that the flashchips data could be extracted out to
be agnostic data of the flashrom code and algorithms.
TEST='R|W|E && --flash-name' on ARM, AMD & Intel DUT's.
Change-Id: I00aaab9c83f305cd47e78c36d9c2867f2b73c396
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66781
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Projects using libflashrom like fwupd expect the user to wait for the
operation to complete. To avoid the user thinking the process has
"hung" or "got stuck" report back the progress complete of the erase,
write and read operations.
Add a new --progress flag to the CLI to report progress of operations.
Include a test for the dummy spi25 device.
TEST=./test_build.sh; ./flashrom -p lspcon_i2c_spi:bus=7 -r /dev/null --progress
Change-Id: I7197572bb7f19e3bdb2bde855d70a0f50fd3854c
Signed-off-by: Richard Hughes <richard@hughsie.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Campello <campello@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/49643
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Heijligen <src@posteo.de>
Part 2 of fixing -Wmissing-prototypes warnings. This patch adds
headers with function prototypes and includes the headers into
source files. This fixes the warnings like this:
warning: no previous prototype for ‘function_name’
[-Wmissing-prototypes]
This patch is needed to sync compiler warning options between meson
and makefile.
TEST=running the following produces no warnings:
meson setup --wipe (to clean build directory)
ninja test
Change-Id: Ia1ff22deb2354569f277649c6575ef2d5ffbb6e0
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/63489
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Heijligen <src@posteo.de>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
At the moment one test (spi25.c) uses wrap of spi_send_command, and
all other existing tests don't care about this function (don't call
it at all). However in the next patch a new test in introduced, which
needs a real spi_send_command.
Following the approach "don't mock unless it is strictly necessary",
all tests that don't care go into real function bucket.
A declaration for __real_spi_send_command is needed for visibility,
this way wrap function can redirect to real function for all other
tests except spi25.c.
Additionally, wrap function moves below mock_chip, so that mock_chip
is visible inside wrap.
BUG=b:181803212
TEST=builds and ninja test
Change-Id: I22945cce3d0f36adaa8032167a3ef4e54eccb611
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/56753
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Without that, the code never calls into spi_send_command (because
everything's known already) and so the expected return values are
never returned.
Change-Id: Iba6a56774ce5b51e0f7072b4600a9479cdabf8c7
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/45431
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
