From: David B. <dbr...@us...> - 2010-04-16 05:14:44
|
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "Main OpenOCD repository". The branch, master has been updated via 620310bcc64a0ba9103c4c05300fe9d25cc92b12 (commit) from b886049c74de147b1ce6f7f0173ecd71323c5c64 (commit) Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those revisions in full, below. - Log ----------------------------------------------------------------- commit 620310bcc64a0ba9103c4c05300fe9d25cc92b12 Author: David Brownell <dbr...@us...> Date: Thu Apr 15 19:48:55 2010 -0700 NOR/core bugfix: restore invariants The The patch labeled "CFI CORE: bug-fix protect single sector" was merged rged without some requested bugfixes. Most significantly it broke invariants in the code, invalidating descriptions and changing the calling convention for underlying drivers. (It (Also wasn't CFI-specific...) Fix that, and Include an update from Antonio Borneo for the degenerate "nothing to do" case, (although that's still in the wrong location. which is presumably why that is it was working in some cases but not all.) src/flash/nor/core.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) Signed-off-by: David Brownell <dbr...@us...> diff --git a/src/flash/nor/core.c b/src/flash/nor/core.c index 18012c6..15e460a 100644 --- a/src/flash/nor/core.c +++ b/src/flash/nor/core.c @@ -56,7 +56,10 @@ int flash_driver_protect(struct flash_bank *bank, int set, int first, int last) int retval; bool updated = false; - /* NOTE: "first == last" means protect just that sector */ + /* NOTE: "first == last" means (un?)protect just that sector. + code including Lower level ddrivers may rely on this "first <= last" + * invariant. + */ /* callers may not supply illegal parameters ... */ if (first < 0 || first > last || last >= bank->num_sectors) @@ -90,10 +93,10 @@ scan: * REVISIT we could handle discontiguous regions by issuing * more than one driver request. How much would that matter? */ - if (i == first) { + if (i == first && i != last) { updated = true; first++; - } else if (i == last) { + } else if (i == last && i != first) { updated = true; last--; } @@ -107,11 +110,19 @@ scan: goto scan; } - /* Single sector, already protected? Nothing to do! */ - if (first > last) + /* Single sector, already protected? Nothing to do! + * We may have trimmed our parameters into this degenerate case. + * + * FIXME repeating the "is_protected==set" test is a giveaway that + * this fast-exit belongs earlier, in the trim-it-down loop; mve. + * */ + if (first == last && bank->sectors[first].is_protected == set) return ERROR_OK; + /* Note that we don't pass illegal parameters to drivers; any + * trimming just turns one valid range into another one. + */ retval = bank->driver->protect(bank, set, first, last); if (retval != ERROR_OK) { ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary of changes: src/flash/nor/core.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) hooks/post-receive -- Main OpenOCD repository |