Unfortunately, EN29F002T, EN29F002AT, EN29F002ANT, EN29F002NT all have exactly the same ID
Improve model number printing.
Add EN29F002(A)(N)B support while I'm at it.
Corresponding to flashrom svn r172 and coreboot v2 svn r3031.
Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>
Acked-by: Markus Boas <bios@ryven.de>
diff --git a/flash.h b/flash.h
index d7c6597..e1e5934 100644
--- a/flash.h
+++ b/flash.h
@@ -109,8 +109,8 @@
#define EN_29F040A 0x7F04
#define EN_29LV010 0x7F6E
#define EN_29LV040A 0x7F4F /* EN_29LV040(A) */
-#define EN_29F002AT 0x7F92
-#define EN_29F002AB 0x7F97
+#define EN_29F002T 0x7F92
+#define EN_29F002B 0x7F97
#define FUJITSU_ID 0x04 /* Fujitsu */
/* MBM29F400TC_STRANGE has a value not mentioned in the data sheet and we
diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
index 71f2d8e..53deb49 100644
--- a/flashchips.c
+++ b/flashchips.c
@@ -42,8 +42,9 @@
probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec},
{"At49F002(N)T",ATMEL_ID, AT_49F002NT, 256, 256,
probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec},
- /* The EN29F002AT can do byte program at arbitrary boundaries. */
- {"EN29F002AT", EON_ID, EN_29F002AT, 256, 256,
+ {"EN29F002(A)(N)T", EON_ID, EN_29F002T, 256, 256,
+ probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec},
+ {"EN29F002(A)(N)B", EON_ID, EN_29F002B, 256, 256,
probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec},
{"MBM29F400TC", FUJITSU_ID, MBM29F400TC_STRANGE, 512, 64 * 1024,
probe_m29f400bt, erase_m29f400bt, write_linuxbios_m29f400bt},