CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[David Woodhouse]

Hi,

I've now started using AMD chips. I have a chip which I believe to be a 
4MiB part with TOP boot blocks. Should be 63*64KiB erase regions followed by 
8*8KiB erase regions.

However, the CFI "Erase Block Region" information reports them in the wrong 
order - the 8*8KiB blocks _before_ the 63*64KiB.

Is there some way to tell the top-boot parts apart from the bottom-boot 
parts?

--
dwmw2






To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[Nick Ivanter]

They surely have differnet Device ID's which can be found in a datasheet
and compared with the reported ones.

Nick

David Woodhouse wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've now started using AMD chips. I have a chip which I believe to be a
> 4MiB part with TOP boot blocks. Should be 63*64KiB erase regions followed by
> 8*8KiB erase regions.
>
> However, the CFI "Erase Block Region" information reports them in the wrong
> order - the 8*8KiB blocks _before_ the 63*64KiB.
>
> Is there some way to tell the top-boot parts apart from the bottom-boot
> parts?
>
> --
> dwmw2
>
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org



To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[David Woodhouse]

On Mon, 25 Dec 2000, Nick Ivanter wrote:

> They surely have differnet Device ID's which can be found in a datasheet
> and compared with the reported ones.

My code to report JEDEC ID for them was returning {0,0}. I'll poke at that
again when I go back to work next week.

-- 
dwmw2




To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[Alice Hennessy]

David Woodhouse wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've now started using AMD chips. I have a chip which I believe to be a
> 4MiB part with TOP boot blocks. Should be 63*64KiB erase regions followed by
> 8*8KiB erase regions.
>
> However, the CFI "Erase Block Region" information reports them in the wrong
> order - the 8*8KiB blocks _before_ the 63*64KiB.
>
> Is there some way to tell the top-boot parts apart from the bottom-boot
> parts?
>
> --
> dwmw2
>
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

In the Am29DL322D/323D/324D spec, there's  a Top/Bottom Boot Sector Flag at
the end of the Primary Vendor-Specific Extended Query at address 4F (word mode)

where 02 = bottom, 03 = top.   I haven't tried it  yet.

Alice



To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Alice Hennessy wrote:

> > Is there some way to tell the top-boot parts apart from the bottom-boot
> > parts?
>
> In the Am29DL322D/323D/324D spec, there's  a Top/Bottom Boot Sector Flag at
> the end of the Primary Vendor-Specific Extended Query at address 4F (word mode)
>
> where 02 = bottom, 03 = top.   I haven't tried it  yet.

Ah - hadn't found that bit, thanks. I'll poke at it in the morning.

So, are the chips violating the CFI spec by recording the blocks in a
strange order, or does the CFI spec not actually guarantee an _ordering_
on the erase regions? It's not clear which is the case - either way,
_someone_ seems to be on crack here.

-- 
dwmw2




To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[Alice Hennessy]

David Woodhouse wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Alice Hennessy wrote:
>
> > > Is there some way to tell the top-boot parts apart from the bottom-boot
> > > parts?
> >
> > In the Am29DL322D/323D/324D spec, there's  a Top/Bottom Boot Sector Flag at
> > the end of the Primary Vendor-Specific Extended Query at address 4F (word mode)
> >
> > where 02 = bottom, 03 = top.   I haven't tried it  yet.
>
> Ah - hadn't found that bit, thanks. I'll poke at it in the morning.
>
> So, are the chips violating the CFI spec by recording the blocks in a
> strange order, or does the CFI spec not actually guarantee an _ordering_
> on the erase regions? It's not clear which is the case - either way,
> _someone_ seems to be on crack here.
>
> --
> dwmw2

I don't see any specific language that states that the regions have to be in order
(too obvious to mention).

BTW,  I tried it and it gives the correct value for my top boot device.

Alice



To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org

Re: CFI ident problems with AMD chips.

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Alice Hennessy wrote:

> I don't see any specific language that states that the regions have to
> be in order (too obvious to mention).

Heh, yeah - I was coming to that conclusion too. Fun. How stupid of me to
assume a modicum of common sense.

-- 
dwmw2




To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org