Fix a segmentation fault that is caused by accessing an invalid
"subedata" pointer on the last iteration of the init_eraseblock loop.
Instead, short circuit the loop condition to check the sub block index
first, and do not access the invalid pointer if it is the last sub
block.
Issue was encountered in:
- OS: OpenBSD 7.5 amd64
- Compiler: clang 16.0.6
- Chip: Macronix MX25U6435E/F
BUG=https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/555
Change-Id: I61bf0d93aa9f0b2b420b146be16fcd5124f0dc5d
Signed-off-by: Grant Pannell <grant@digitaldj.net>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/84234
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: DigitalDJ
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Based on public Intel 700 Series PCH datasheet, DOC 743835 rev 004.
The IDs of IoT chipset SKUs (ending with E) can only be found in "12th
Gen Intel® Core™ Processors Family (Formerly Known as Alder Lake -S)
for IoT Platforms External Design Specification (EDS) Addendum" DOC
634528 rev 2.7 (NDA).
TEST=Probe flash on Z790 chipset. Run the ich_descriptors_tool and
check the output is correct as expected.
Change-Id: I13ac52d5400c0e2260e12d605077fc2182c379ef
Signed-off-by: Michał Żygowski <michal.zygowski@3mdeb.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83854
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Sergii Dmytruk <sergii.dmytruk@3mdeb.com>
The patch adds new functionality to the test: tracking the areas of
chip memory that were modified (i.e. by erase or write operation),
and then checking those areas were completely covered by verify
operation.
The test operates over the mock chip memory of 16 bytes, so it is
possible to track each byte which was modified, and assert that is
has been verified afterwards.
Adding the test found a bug which is fixed in this commit:
Post-cleanup after processing unaligned region for the case when end
region needs to be extended to align with erase block. Writing was
done correctly, but post-processing of newcontents could cause
one-off offset at the end of the region, which would make
verification appear false-negative (see test cases #16-19).
Change-Id: I3c5d55a0deb20f23f4072caac8c0dce04cc98fd4
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/84078
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
This makes flashrom sleep more eagerly rather than busy-waiting,
observing that most delays in flashrom are either less than 100
microseconds (barely enough time to get any work done, even on a fast
machine) or much more than 1 millisecond (very wasteful to busy-loop).
Since we believe most systems offer good timer resolution that should
provide sleep latency on the order of 100 microseconds, this is a
reasonable default.
For DOS, the default is set to 50ms because the best available timing
source on DOS only ticks at about 20 Hz.
Signed-off-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
Change-Id: I0f431d240c670446218b14811ef62a34e4c83da2
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/81608
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
removed FEATURE_WRSR_EXT2 from the model after datasheet review.
replace
printlock = SPI_PRETTYPRINT_STATUS_REGISTER_BP3_SRWD,
.unlock = SPI_DISABLE_BLOCKPROTECT,
with
.printlock = SPI_PRETTYPRINT_STATUS_REGISTER_BP4_SRWD,
.unlock = SPI_DISABLE_BLOCKPROTECT_BP4_SRWD,
GD25B256E: 3V 256Mbit, Quad enabled.
GD25R256E: GD25B256E features + RPMC, so they share the same datasheet on flash side
https://www.gigadevice.com.cn/Public/Uploads/uploadfile/files/20230627/DS-00658-GD25B256E-Rev1.1.pdf
Tested both models on ch347 with erase, write, read and protection.
Change-Id: Ie733e0c2e35fa4797f5198f2c8334469b65f402c
Signed-off-by: Victor Lim <vlim@gigadevice.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83998
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Both of these chips were tested in-circuit with an SOIC-8 clamp and two
different BusPirate boards: the BPv3.6 from Adafruit (sku 237) and the
BPv3.6a from Sparkfun (sku TOL-12942), on a Fedora 38 host, using
flashrom 9a570318 (changes rebased since then).
Change-Id: Ib3c94f03a132a912bb4bb9d36e8783f4468587c4
Signed-off-by: Samantaz Fox <coding@samantaz.fr>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83970
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
The STLinkV3 Mini does not support the bridge API,
it return LIBUSB_IO_ERROR when querying
the bridge version. The official ST updater does
not lists the bridge version in the info screen.
Due to it's construction (additional connector on the
bottom) it is likely that ST disabled the bridge functions
on the castellated pads.
Change-Id: Ic1ea4ca7acedca5d374cff8fcef450c18e55a9e8
Signed-off-by: Miklos Marton <martonmiklosqdev@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83921
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
In the latest pciutils(v3.13.0), it supports accessing pci registers
by ecam. This patch uses libpci version check to decide whether
flashrom calls libpci and use 0xcf8/0xcfc or ecam to access pci
registers.
BUG=b:359813524
TEST=with libpci >= 3.13.0, flashrom is working with ECAM access
Change-Id: I4549f87c8b01da0a1d3d8ce0b3b75c1f5fa2cbab
Signed-off-by: Kane Chen <kane.chen@intel.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83896
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Hsuan-ting Chen <roccochen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
Current code path for erase and write has been enabled in the tree
since May 2023, which is more than 1 year ago (15 months ago),
and legacy path has been disabled since the same time.
Current logic has been officially released in v1.4.0 in July 2024.
Change-Id: I08fd686fecf6a5313eea2d66b368661c664f4800
Signed-off-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@flashrom.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83846
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Aarya <aarya.chaumal@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
As was described in the version 1.4 release notes, this deletes the
Makefile and supporting elements leaving Meson as the only supported
buildsystem.
Signed-off-by: Peter Marheine <pmarheine@chromium.org>
Change-Id: Ib3cf22cf636ef9b70527b734ffa34aead2a74edd
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83673
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
added GD25LF256F on flashchips.c
added GIGADEVICE_GD25LF256F=0x6319 on flashchip.h
GD25LF256F is a higher performance 1.8V 256Mbit SPI flash
I have tested on CH347 with erase, program, read, protection.
Change-Id: I21a71606476e823faa38a7920aa2b10e25d68d26
Signed-off-by: Victor <vlim@gigadevice.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83717
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
The wiki is moving around, and the URLs are probably not final. Until
the download locations can be nailed down to their final location, tell
curl to follow HTTP redirects.
Change-Id: I52f1c786a376f5c7394fa5bffc689e58f8691c75
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <patrick@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/83672
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
Feature bits are too complicated to understand if we only read the
codes/datasheets. Add a new section in how_to_add_new_chip to add more
details about each feature bits.
Add the detailed explanation for WRSR handling first. If this new
section looks good, I'll try to add some more sections in further
commits.
BUG=b:345154585
TEST=meson compile -C builddir and view the doc.
Change-Id: I34c20933a375380c8702f79ac637595cd3466000
Signed-off-by: Hsuan Ting Chen <roccochen@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/82908
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Anastasia Klimchuk <aklm@chromium.org>
