From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from oe75.law10.hotmail.com ([64.4.14.210] helo=hotmail.com) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 175a0v-0006YN-00 for ; Wed, 08 May 2002 23:34:25 +0100 From: "Gregg C Levine" To: Subject: RE: Jedec probe for strange 28F800B3 chips (patch) Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 18:34:04 -0400 Message-ID: <002201c1f6e0$75675ce0$3551580c@who> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <1020891940.2172.32.camel@sycamore.mit.edu> Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Hello from Gregg C Levine Parts like that, are not uncommon, just darned annoying to fellow designers. Suggest you call them, part-number-A, such as 28F800B3A. In fact I suggest you examine the parts, to see what part number they have stamped on them. I'd be surprised, if the thought never occurred to Intel before. ------------------- Gregg C Levine mrspock1962@hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."=A0 Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org [mailto:linux-mtd- > admin@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Colin Cross > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 5:06 PM > To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org > Subject: Jedec probe for strange 28F800B3 chips (patch) >=20 > I'm working on an embedded system that has two Flash chips labeled > 28F800B3-10BD. The Intel datasheets say they should have an identifier > of 0x8893 (which matches jedec_probe.c), but they report an identifier > of 0x889D. I found one errata datasheet that says the correct > identifier for these chips is in fact 0x889D. However, the block map of > this chip is completely different from the one described in the > datasheets. It has 1 16kB block, 2 8kB blocks, 1 96kB, and 7 128kB > blocks. This matches the block map for some other random Intel 8Mb > flash chip, but I can't find any datasheets that give this block map and > identifier together. I've added these chips to jedec_probe.c, and they > work fine once added, but I'm at a loss as to why these chips don't > agree with the datasheets. Can anyone offer any insight? Does anyone > have 28F800B3 chips that follow the datasheet? I've attached a patch > that adds support for them, but I'm not sure what to call them (Intel > 28F800B3B version 2? for now).