Other chips (at least Winbond) will benefit from this change.
Also, drop the FIXME comment, as it can be misleading. The
"pretty print" functions should only display values from the
Status Register, so using an inappropriate function might only
confuse user.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Goncharov <chat@joursoir.net>
Change-Id: I7169a2312698343e1065cdca91a3985e00cb3804
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/78874
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
XM25QH80B has the same ID as M45PE80, but has more features.
Tested with CH341A.
Change-Id: Ib51225426d8d1a381d45af3574e5ba2bf02837aa
Signed-off-by: Sungbo Eo <mans0n@gorani.run>
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/63516
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Based on https://github.com/flashrom/flashrom/pull/204
squashed with fixes of IS25WQ040 size: it is 4Mbits, not 4MBytes, see
https://www.issi.com/WW/pdf/25WQ020-040.pdf
Tested read, write and erase with ft2232_spi-based "Tigard" programmer.
Change-Id: I072c6b94d7931637d1c2721c3316205f2d57320e
Signed-off-by: Roman Stingler <roman.stingler@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Vasily Galkin <galkin-vv@ya.ru>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/58179
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Tested using the linux_spi programmer on a Raspberry Pi.
Datasheet:
https://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Macronix/MX25L3255E.pdf
Signed-off-by: Joseph C. Lehner <joseph.c.lehner@gmail.com>
Change-Id: I65968771e22e6b823d2d6192c33f5b0cba25d5b9
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/57410
Reviewed-by: Nicholas Chin <nic.c3.14@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Tested: read, write and erase.
Chip (and datasheet) have recenty been removed from XMC's website
but can still be retrieved through web archive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20221122191724/https://www.semiee.com/file/XMC/XMC-XM25QH128A.pdf
Signed-off-by: Stijn Segers <foss@volatilesystems.org>
Change-Id: Iced40403c6694a55fd648ea2785cdcba21712234
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69309
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
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>
Add reg_bits for W25Q256JW_DTR as per the datasheet.
BUG=b:263410331
TEST=Verified on google/rex.
w/o this patch:
Failed to get WP status: WP operations are not implemented for this chip
w/ this patch:
flashrom -p internal --wp-range 0x0,0x2000000
flashrom -p internal --wp-enable
flashrom -p internal --wp-status
flashrom -p internal -E <---- failed to erase the flash as WP (which is
expected)
Signed-off-by: Kapil Porwal <kapilporwal@google.com>
Change-Id: I8ac23f706d4293a7d7d11ad6b2f62526fb075367
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/70549
Reviewed-by: Subrata Banik <subratabanik@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Using both a Dediprog SF100 and a Bus Pirate, read and erase works
correctly on a MT25QL128 but writes were failing to take effect.
Currently, the entry in flashchips.c indicates that this device supports
4-byte addressing. Micron's datasheet indicates that it does not.
After removing FEATURE_4BA_WREN from feature_bits, both SF100 and
Bus Pirate were able to successfully read, erase, and write a
MT25QL128 so also marking as tested.
Change-Id: I6341456c722840a413bd2c51fe9a78bbda5cdbab
Signed-off-by: Rick Altherr <kc8apf@kc8apf.net>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/71206
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
This patch adds WP register bits and decode range for Flash
Chip `W25Q512NW`.
TEST=Able to flash AP FW, wp-enable/disable on Google/rex device
which has flash chip `W25Q512NW`.
Signed-off-by: Subrata Banik <subratabanik@google.com>
Change-Id: Ic5148f71404466dcf7772e3eb6e1800eb8666696
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/67827
Reviewed-by: Kapil Porwal <kapilporwal@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Reviewed-by: Eric Lai <eric_lai@quanta.corp-partner.google.com>
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
As noted in a comment on
`commit 86fc9cf7ab221bc54ef6f10252e296fc2d7a22d2`, the GD25Q256D
datasheet indicates that the chip does not require a WREN command to
enter 4BA mode.
Testing has confirmed that a WREN command is not required, so change the
flashchip feature flags from FEATURE_4BA_WREN to FEATURE_4BA.
Ticket: https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/356
BUG=none
BRANCH=none
TEST=read/write/erase/verify GD25Q256D flash with FT2232H programmer
TEST=called spi_enter_exit_4ba(true), dumped registers, checked ADS=1.
Change-Id: I96e48933f33c52c0d10a0d4cb7f7e07c1fceab99
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/70342
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Flash chips XM25QH256C and XM25QU256C support the 4-byte program
command (0x12) according to their datasheets, but the feature flag is
not enabled in flashchips.c, so enable it to allow this feature to be
used.
TICKET: https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/371
BUG=b:259493706
TEST=build
Change-Id: I96c80762fcda2af6028c7a53d8c545b0c6565cbd
Signed-off-by: Liam Flaherty <liamflaherty@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69713
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
This paves the way to allow for the conversion of flashchip printlock
func ptr to enumerate values. This change should be a NOP.
TEST=`diff -u <(objdump -D flashchips.o_bk) <(objdump -D flashchips.o)`.
Change-Id: Icff868d9454e9b0a059a736457bb562430436033
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69844
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
This paves the way to allow for the conversion of flashchip unlock
func ptr to enumerate values. This change should be a NOP.
TEST=`diff -u <(objdump -D flashchips.o_bk) <(objdump -D flashchips.o)`.
Change-Id: I3ed51142cd22becc8286959f5504565158fa2de0
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69843
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
This paves the way to allow for the conversion of flashchip erase_block
func ptr to enumerate values. This change should be a NOP.
TEST=`diff -u <(objdump -D flashchips.o_bk) <(objdump -D flashchips.o)`.
Change-Id: I122295ec9add0fe0efd27273c9725e5d64f6dbe2
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/69131
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.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: I612d46fefedf2b69e7e2064aa857fa0756efb4e7
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <quasisec@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/66788
Reviewed-by: Nikolai Artemiev <nartemiev@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Felix Singer <felixsinger@posteo.net>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.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>
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>
