[coreboot] [PATCH] flashrom: Add external programmer delay functions
Uwe Hermann
uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Fri Jun 5 19:23:51 CEST 2009
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 06:28:41PM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Add external programmer delay functions so external programmers can
> handle the delay on their own if needed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net>
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann <uwe at hermann-uwe.de>
...but see below.
> Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h (Revision 576)
> +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/flash.h (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@
> uint8_t (*chip_readb) (const chipaddr addr);
> uint16_t (*chip_readw) (const chipaddr addr);
> uint32_t (*chip_readl) (const chipaddr addr);
> +
> + void (*delay) (int usecs);
> };
>
> extern const struct programmer_entry programmer_table[];
> @@ -118,6 +120,7 @@
> uint8_t chip_readb(const chipaddr addr);
> uint16_t chip_readw(const chipaddr addr);
> uint32_t chip_readl(const chipaddr addr);
> +void programmer_delay(uint32_t usecs);
Why uint32_t here and int above?
> Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c (Revision 576)
> +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/spi.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@
> */
> /* FIXME: We assume spi_read_status_register will never fail. */
> while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP)
> - sleep(1);
> + programmer_delay(1000000);
I'd also make this 100 * 1000 as below, easier on the eyes.
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@
> */
> /* FIXME: We assume spi_read_status_register will never fail. */
> while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP)
> - sleep(1);
> + programmer_delay(1000000);
Ditto.
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -485,7 +485,7 @@
> * This usually takes 100-4000 ms, so wait in 100 ms steps.
> */
> while (spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP)
> - usleep(100 * 1000);
> + programmer_delay(100 * 1000);
> return 0;
> }
> Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c (Revision 576)
> +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/am29f040b.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
> chip_writeb(0x55, bios + 0x2AA);
> chip_writeb(0x30, bios + address);
>
> - sleep(2);
> + programmer_delay(1000000 * 2);
Maybe 2 * 1000 * 1000, same format as above.
> Index: flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c
> ===================================================================
> --- flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c (Revision 576)
> +++ flashrom-programmer_delay/internal.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -195,6 +195,18 @@
> return *(volatile uint32_t *) addr;
> }
>
> +void internal_delay(int usecs)
> +{
> + /* If the delay is >1 s, use usleep because timing does not need to
> + * be so precise.
Hm, but why not use myusec_delay() always? Does it have drawbacks?
> + */
> + if (usecs > 1000000) {
> + usleep(usecs);
> + } else {
> + myusec_delay(usecs);
> + }
> +}
Uwe.
--
http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
More information about the coreboot
mailing list