[flashrom] [PATCH] Add support for SST25WF080B 1 MB flash.

[Stefan Tauner]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 10:27:15 -0500
Ben Gardner <bgardner at wabtec.com> wrote:

> Apart from the JEDEC ID (621614) the difference from the SST25WF080 is that
> it lacks op codes 0xAD (AAI Word program) and 0x52 (32K erase).
> 
> Tested under Linux with spidev.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ben Gardner <bgardner at wabtec.com>
> ---
>  flashchips.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  flashchips.h |  3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
> index 8b5d1ec..b71bd2c 100644
> --- a/flashchips.c
> +++ b/flashchips.c
> @@ -11803,6 +11803,41 @@ const struct flashchip flashchips[] = {
> 
>         {
>                 .vendor         = "SST",
> +               .name           = "SST25WF080B",
> +               .bustype        = BUS_SPI,
> +               .manufacture_id = SST_ID_62,
> +               .model_id       = SST_SST25WF080B,
> +               .total_size     = 1024,
> +               .page_size      = 256,
> +               .feature_bits   = FEATURE_WRSR_EITHER,
> +               .tested         = TEST_OK_PREW,
> +               .probe          = probe_spi_rdid,
> +               .probe_timing   = TIMING_ZERO,
> +               .block_erasers  =
> +               {
> +                       {
> +                               .eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 256} },
> +                               .block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
> +                       }, {
> +                               .eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 16} },
> +                               .block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
> +                       }, {
> +                               .eraseblocks = { {1024 * 1024, 1} },
> +                               .block_erase = spi_block_erase_60,
> +                       }, {
> +                               .eraseblocks = { {1024 * 1024, 1} },
> +                               .block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
> +                       },
> +               },
> +               .printlock      = spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25, /* *does* have a BP3 but it is useless */
> +               .unlock         = spi_disable_blockprotect_bp3_srwd,
> +               .write          = spi_chip_write_256,
> +               .read           = spi_chip_read, /* Fast read (0x0B) supported */
> +               .voltage        = {1650, 1950},
> +       },
> +
> +       {
> +               .vendor         = "SST",
>                 .name           = "SST28SF040A",
>                 .bustype        = BUS_PARALLEL,
>                 .manufacture_id = SST_ID,
> diff --git a/flashchips.h b/flashchips.h
> index 07ae49d..d6b2b8d 100644
> --- a/flashchips.h
> +++ b/flashchips.h
> @@ -659,6 +659,7 @@
>   * byte of device ID is related to log(bitsize) at least for some chips.
>   */
>  #define SST_ID                 0xBF    /* SST */
> +#define SST_ID_62              0x62    /* SST */
>  #define SST_SST25LF020_REMS    0x43    /* REMS or RES opcode */
>  #define SST_SST25WF512         0x2501
>  #define SST_SST25WF010         0x2502
> @@ -669,7 +670,7 @@
>   * IDs and were not spotted in the wild yet. Their datasheets show a 4 byte long response w/o a vendor ID. */
>  #define SST_SST25WF020A                /* 0x62 0x16 0x12 0x00 */
>  #define SST_SST25WF040B                /* 0x62 0x16 0x13 0x00 */
> -#define SST_SST25WF080B                /* 0x62 0x16 0x14 0x00 */
> +#define SST_SST25WF080B                0x1614  /* 0x62 0x16 0x14 0x00 */
>  #define SST_SST25VF512_REMS    0x48    /* REMS or RES opcode, same as SST25VF512A */
>  #define SST_SST25VF010_REMS    0x49    /* REMS or RES opcode, same as SST25VF010A */
>  #define SST_SST25VF020_REMS    0x43    /* REMS or RES opcode, same as SST25LF020A */

Hi Ben,

thanks for your patch. It had a lot of wrong white space (spaces
instead of tabs) and you missed a few things:
 - That first ID byte is actually Sanyo's. One can find some news
   articles on a cooperation between those on flash memory and other
   stuff in about 2003+. So my guess is that those chips were the
   outcome of that cooperation.
 - The comment in flashchip.h stating that these chips were not seen in
   the wild is no longer valid apparently. :)
 - The status register does not contain a BP2 bit but a top/bottom bit.
 - There is no EWSR instruction so it has to use FEATURE_WRSR_WREN.

But the main part seems fine!

I have fixed those errors and added an appropriate status register
pretty print function. While at it, I have also added the
SST25WF020A and SST25WF040B as well.

The patch was additionally
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at alumni.tuwien.ac.at>
and
Acked-by: Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at alumni.tuwien.ac.at>
and commited in r1901. Thanks!
-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner