unable to write flashrom, functionality broken?

[Dale Walsh]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Feb 02, 2011, at 22:27 PM, Larry Finger wrote:

> On 02/02/2011 01:50 AM, Dale Walsh wrote:
>> On Feb 01, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Larry Finger wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/01/2011 05:23 AM, Dale Walsh wrote:
>>>> I had a hard drive failure which forced me to perform a fresh/clean
>>>> installation of ubuntu 10 on a new drive since the old drive no  
>>>> longer
>>>> functions (it was rather old).
>>>>
>>>> My use of the b43 software is only for modification of the PCI  
>>>> ID's of
>>>> the flashrom and the original installation was provided to me on  
>>>> the HD.
>>>>
>>>> Now I am unable to write the flashrom after the new installation it
>>>> always reports "write error: Operation Not Supported" and this  
>>>> is using
>>>> the same cards I was flashing before, I even tried using
>>>> a previously modified card and I get the same failure.
>>>>
>>>> Since it worked before I can only conclude that the new software is
>>>> broken and the ability to write is a requirement, can someone  
>>>> help me
>>>> resolve this please.
>>>
>>> I do not doubt that the SPROM writing function is broken, but I  
>>> wonder
>>> why you
>>> are needing it now. Why was it necessary to rewrite the SPROM in  
>>> the first
>>> place? Once that was done, then it should never need to be done  
>>> again.
>>> Please
>>> explain what you did and what you are doing now.
>>
>> Since not all cards are created equal I take a card with specific
>> features and functionality, change the ID's to my own for use with my
>> own custom drivers which provides added functionality for cards  
>> with my
>> ID's.
>>
>> If the cards do not have my ID's they have the basic functionality  
>> that
>> people are used to seeing, with my ID's they have the ability to run
>> in simultaneous dual band mode (2.4ghz and 5ghz adhoc) and I use  
>> these
>> ID's to ensure that the drivers only work on cards I approve.
>>
>> My only need for linux is to rebrand the cards with my ID's.
>>
>> If I understood enough about the write mechanism I would forego  
>> the b43
>> code all together and create an app that reads and writes the  
>> flashrom
>> but the time involved  in sifting through the ubuntu code due to it's
>> source structure makes it a daunting task that turns me off.
>>
>>
>> As before when working in the original installation (provided to  
>> me as a
>> working installation) I would do the following: (both cat and cp  
>> fail)
>>
>>
>> sudo su; # become root to avoid permission issues
>>
>> cd /PATH TO DIR OF ssb_sprom; # I verify ssb_sprom exists in this  
>> location
>>
>> rmmod b43; # unload the driver
>>
>> cat updated_sprom >ssb_sprom; # write the updated file
>>
>>
>> This results in write failure under the new installation.
>>
>>
>> cp updated_sprom >ssb_sprom
>>
>>
>> This also results in a write failure under the new installation.
>
> I'm a little confused as the PCI IDs are not in the SPROM. Using  
> the procedure
> you describe, you would be unable to change them.
>
> You say you use Ubuntu 10. Is it 10.04 or 10.10? The earlier one  
> uses kernel
> 2.6.32, which I have not tested; however, I did try kernels 2.6.34  
> and 2.6.38.
> Both could write the SPROM for a Cardbus device without any problem.
>
> Larry

Yes you must be confused since your making those claims.

Perhaps you might wish to look at "ssb-sprom --help".

All the information I can find about modifying the sprom data talk  
about using ssb-sprom to make the changes.

The only thing that I have never been able to make work without  
corrupting the data is the status LED's, if I try to change them the  
card stop working and this test was performed on BCM94321 based cards  
and the test involved only changes to the status LED's so I have  
accepted that some changes are just not possible.

Installed version is 10.04, a CD which was mailed to me by requesting  
it directly from ubuntu.

What is frustrating me is that you are questioning my reasoning for  
requiring this functionality and making claims which you are  
apparently unknowledgeable about rather than focusing on the issue  
which is the failure to write.

I'll download an image for 10.10 and try that, if it works I'll let  
you know.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFNSpZliD9DTPch4RQRAsI1AJ9SybdL8C9MYsNGXe3ROzbnHsgq4QCfXY3x
ioSasOuRF2xx1LalBQdrv70=
=+QjR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----