Hi, On Thu Oct 24, 2024 at 9:08 PM CEST, Holger Wansing wrote: > "Diederik de Haas" <didi.deb...@cknow.org> wrote (Sun, 20 Oct 2024 16:28:41 > +0200): > > The 'cs21' device is a (different) Rock64 (rk3328): > > > > And now the partition stuff: > > > > ``` > > root@cs21:~# parted -s /dev/mmcblk1 print > > Model: MMC NCard (sd/mmc) > > Disk /dev/mmcblk1: 61.9GB > > Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B > > Partition Table: gpt > > Disk Flags: > > > > Number Start End Size File system Name Flags > > 1 32.8kB 16.8MB 16.7MB primary > > 2 16.8MB 256MB 239MB fat16 primary boot, esp > > 3 256MB 61.9GB 61.6GB ext4 primary > > > > ``` > > > > And 'quartz64a' is a Pine64 Quartz64 Model A (rk3566): > > > > ``` > > root@quartz64a:~# parted -s /dev/mmcblk1 print > > Model: MMC A3A562 (sd/mmc) > > Disk /dev/mmcblk1: 124GB > > Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B > > Partition Table: gpt > > Disk Flags: > > > > Number Start End Size File system Name Flags > > 1 32.8kB 3670kB 3637kB loader1_part > > 2 8389kB 12.6MB 4194kB loader2_part > > 3 12.6MB 16.8MB 4194kB trust_part > > 4 16.8MB 134MB 117MB efi_part > > 5 134MB 124GB 124GB ext4 root_part legacy_boot > > > > ``` > > > > And I just changed the 'legacy_boot' flag to 'boot' on the SDcard with > > which I did my test, which then (apparently) also triggers the 'esp' > > flag and it booted with that too. > > So it looks like it just needs some indication (flag) of what the boot > > device is, but it doesn't (seem to) matter which one. > > Hmm, I'm irritated now: > here you have a device|installation, which has the legacy_boot flag > installed, but it did not work|boot despite of this. And you changed that > legacy_boot flag into a boot flag, and that made the problem go away? > (so the device boots fine).
There are 3 devices under discussion: 1) `cs21`: Rock64 running Stable and apparently using EFI and it looks like I installed that with d-i, but then manually made sure the first 16 MiB remained free 2) `quartz64a`: Quartz64 Model-A, running Testing/Sid and I manually created that system (no d-i), including all its partitions 3) `debian-di-rock64`: This is *another* Rock64 device (I have 4 in total) with which I performed the test with a very recent d-i. On this system everything seemed to go well, but it still didn't boot into it. So that's when I started to experiment with the 'legacy_boot' flag as I was pretty sure that was the problem ... and it was. I then went comparing with system '1' and '2' and that's when I noticed 'legacy_boot' vs 'boot'/'esp'. But without some 'boot' flag set, the device would NOT boot. > So, why should we then do some work to implement the setting of the > legacy_boot flag on arm64? I do not know what the details are between 'boot' and 'legacy_boot'. So I can't tell if setting 'boot' would be sufficient (in all cases). > And here, from another mail: > "Diederik de Haas" <didi.deb...@cknow.org> wrote (Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:26:28 > +0200): > > On Sun Oct 20, 2024 at 8:49 PM CEST, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > > > So it looks like it just needs some indication (flag) of what the boot > > > > device is, but it doesn't (seem to) matter which one. > > > > > > Weird. Does it have to be on the boot/root partition or can it be on any > > > other partition ? > > > > It appears to not matter if it's 'boot' or 'legacy_boot', but it (ofc?) > > needs to be set on the partition with the kernel as that needs to be > > started for the rest of the boot process. > > My guess is that on the tested system it tried to do something with TFTP > > as it couldn't find a kernel as the '[legacy_]boot' flag was not set, > > thus couldn't find a kernel thus tried another option (tftp). > > Here you also imply, that both boot or legacy_boot flag do the job. That's what my (semi) random tests seemed to show. But as said above, I don't know for sure. > So, can I understand this, as there is no need to set the legacy_boot flag, > but just adjust the situations, where the 'boot' flag is being set? > > Or do we explicitely want to support both the legacy_boot and the boot flag, > because we know that some systems are buggy and one needs the first > and other need the latter flag? I DON'T KNOW. I did several tests on one Rock64 that I have and compared that with some other devices that I have in the hope that it would be useful. But apparently it only pissed you off.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
