NAND is sufferered from Bad blocks and bit errors. Thats why usually
exists a bad block handling and an ECC. Am I wrong, that I miss both
on uboot for it's environment?
Or is my uboot just to old (2010.06) and newer versions handle this?
Is there a special setting necessary to handle this?
I see t
2011/9/6 Marek Vasut :
> On Tuesday, September 06, 2011 04:16:59 PM Arno Steffen wrote:
>> NAND is sufferered from Bad blocks and bit errors. Thats why usually
>> exists a bad block handling and an ECC. Am I wrong, that I miss both
>> on uboot for it's environment?
>
2011/9/7 Wolfgang Wegner :
> Hi Arno,
>
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 08:20:22AM +0200, Arno Steffen wrote:
>> Hi Marek and Wolfgang, Thanks for your answers.
>> I kept already one sector space for bad blocks, so 1st environment is
>> at c., 2nd at 10.. Blocksize
2011/9/7 Wolfgang Wegner :
> Hi,
>
> sorry, not sure about it right now, but could it be you simply need
> to define CONFIG_ENV_RANGE to some multiple of the sector size?
>
> At least is what I seem to remember...
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
You are my hero - thats what I'm looking for ! Out of all boards
in
Assumed Uboot and environment are located in NAND flash.
Just a short question: Is the ECC done before the CRC check, or is the
CRC check done first?
>From my observation I would assume that first CRC is checked. But if
so - imho in my case (environment in NAND, which is handled with ECC)
this woul
2011/9/20 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>> Assumed Uboot and environment are located in NAND flash.
>> Just a short question: Is the ECC done before the CRC check, or is the
>> CRC check done first?
>> From my obser
2011/9/21 Scott Wood :
> On 09/21/2011 04:59 AM, Arno Steffen wrote:
>> Thank you for clarification. Although I am estonished, that after some
>> time of running 2 devices come up with CRC errors (with just read
>> access to environment!!).
>> Unfortunatly I don't
The flash (MT29F1G) on my omap board supports OTP. Is there any support by
u-boot to have access (write/read) to that OPT area?
What's to do to get it working and how to use?
I've been searching a lot in the net, but hasn't been succesful with that.
___
U
To make a more stable system I want to put a second reduced linux
(kernel/rootfs) onto flash memory.
This should be boot automatically, if #1 fails for any reason.
I tried to add this in bootcmd, but execution will be interuppted if the
first bootm failes.
Is there any chance to do so?
(maybe it is
@ Wolfgang W.
I am using a OMAP board with a Cortex A8
Ok, it normaly executes commands after each other. But in case the rootfs is
invalid in boots kernel and ends up with kernel panic which causes a reboot.
In this way the second command will not be executed
bootcmd=run boot_fs1; run boot_fs2
2010/1/14 Wolfgang Denk
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> In message <804f0d21001140104o3543921cx2b4422fbc8a9...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
> >
> > Ok, it normaly executes commands after each other. But in case the rootfs
> is
> > invalid in boots kernel and e
2010/1/14 Wolfgang Denk
>
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> please keep the mailing list on Cc:
>
> In message <804f0d21001140252v164b7df0p1d1e94f3d316...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
> >
> > > > Although I add hush to my config file
> > > > #de
Testing the latest release (2009-08) I missed the NAND support (there
is just ONENAND).
Adding the line in config
#define CONFIG_CMD_NAND /* NAND support */
cause a error in building uboot:
...drivers/mtd/nand/libnand.a(nand.o): In function `nand_init_chip':
/opt/src/ub/u-boot-ti-gi
Changing my OMAP EVM board to newest uboot 2009-11 I do have a problem
with ethernet.
Although the kernel could be loaded via tftp perfectly, the upcoming
kernel complains about invalid MAC.
Kernel command line: mem=128M console=ttyS0,115200n8
root=/dev/mtdblock8 rw rootfstype=jffs2 ip=dhcp
...
lo
o
2010/1/19 Prafulla Wadaskar :
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de
>> [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Arno Steffen
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 3:14 PM
>> To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
>> Subject: [U-Boot] Linux
2010/1/19 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> In message <804f0d21001190554r13f582abl3dbbc80b50df3...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>> I think this is a uboot bug.
>
> You sound as is you were really sure about this.
I can't be sure, as I don't kn
2010/1/19 Daniel Gorsulowski :
> On ARM, I solved that problem as follows:
>
> 1. Add "ethaddr=$(ethaddr)" to your kernel command line. e.g.:
> mem=128M console=ttyS0,115200n8 ethaddr=$(ethaddr)
>
> 2. Apply this patch on linux kernel (approved on v2.6.31):
>
Thanks for this idea. I checked the
I did a small mod in uboot now. After each ethernet-access the
interface chip seems to get a soft reset, which deletes the mac
address in its registers.
So in smc911x.h () in function smc911x_reset I commented the line
// smc911x_reg_write(dev, HW_CFG, HW_CFG_SRST);
It is somehow pitty
To set my uboot environment (2008-10) I upload a script to uboot
set serverip192.168.90.230
a) set bootargs_nfsmem=128M console=ttyS2,115200n8 noinitrd rw
root=/dev/nfs nfsroot=$(serverip):/opt/rootfs, nolock
b) set bootargs_nfsmem=128M console=ttyS2,115200n8 noinitrd rw
root=/
Best regards
Arno
2010/3/4 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> In message <804f0d21003040708h672d4814m6e1c4d5f32ea9...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>> To set my uboot environment (2008-10) I upload a script to uboot
> ...
>> I case a) the serverip while
I just checked the 2010-03 rc2.
Unfortunatly no NAND support in config file.
I added
#define CONFIG_CMD_NAND /* NAND support */
#define CONFIG_ENV_IS_IN_NAND 1
but get some errors:
lib_arm/libarm.a(board.o): In function `init_func_i2c':
/opt/src/ub/uboot2010-03-rc2/u-bo
With adding this lines it is working:
#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NAND)
#define CONFIG_NAND_OMAP_GPMC
#define GPMC_NAND_ECC_LP_x16_LAYOUT1
#define CONFIG_ENV_IS_IN_NAND 1
#elif defined(CONFIG_CMD_ONENAND)
#define CONFIG_ENV_IS_IN_ONENAND1
#endif
It would be nice to add this to con
In one of my devices, uboot-environment is located at a bad block.
"save
Saving Environment to NAND...
Erasing Nand...
Skipping bad block at 0x000c
Writing to Nand... FAILED!"
In my memory mapping I have already reseverd 2blocks.
How can I setup uboot in a way, that it will look at c or
In one of my devices, uboot-environment is located at a bad block.
"save
Saving Environment to NAND...
Erasing Nand...
Skipping bad block at 0x000c
Writing to Nand... FAILED!"
In my memory mapping I have already reseverd 2blocks.
How can I setup uboot in a way, that it will look at c or
I am very sorry, apologize me! My fault.
I haven't seen my mail in the mailing archive, so I thought it was
just saved as draft or forget to write [uboot] in subject.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boo
re suffered,
not just OMAP.
There will be compared a corrected bits before and after correction,
and it send an error message, if bits are corrected (instead of only
if it can not be corrected).
Best regards
Arno
2011/10/21 Arno Steffen :
> I think reason that SW_ECC is not working, is
I have been used u-boot supportet (or better say not suppported) by TI
in their latest PSP/SDK (Juli 2011).
Base is 2010.06. But this issue was also inside older versions.
- Arno
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/l
Sure, Scott, not blame on you. Just frustating, doing bughunting for
issues that have been fixed long time ago. I would expect a bit more
from TI in this case. My fault obviously.
Ok, finally I got it, that's what matters.
- Arno
2011/10/28 Scott Wood :
> On 10/28/2011 01:10 AM, Arno
2011/9/22 Wolfgang Denk :
> Dear Arno Steffen,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> This is a good advice - I will check this next. Thanks, Scott!
>> I use an OMAP3 (simular to EVM 3530 board) with uboot-2010.03.
>> My assumption of not using ECC (or doin
I did tests with OMAP3 uboot. The SW-ECC (testet 1 bit, 4 bit BCH)
doesn't correct errors in environment (during power-up).
Compiling uboot for default HW-ECC - correction works fine.
Testet with TI's PSP 4.02.00.07 (almost like arago latest version).
I modified single bits by adding a patch (than
selected\n");
The ecc struct is not setup?!? Someone has an idea?
@TI stuff: if you are not the right person to address this, can you
please forward?
Thanks
- Arno
2011/10/20 Arno Steffen :
> I did tests with OMAP3 uboot. The SW-ECC (testet 1 bit, 4 bit BCH)
> doesn't correct er
Checking the TI ARM U-Boot Custodian Tree
(http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot/u-boot-ti.git) I see
the latest release is 2009.08.
Am I in the wrong tree or what might be the reason?
Best regards
Arno
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.
2010/10/13 John Rigby :
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Arno Steffen
> wrote:
>> Checking the TI ARM U-Boot Custodian Tree
>> (http://git.denx.de/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=u-boot/u-boot-ti.git) I see
>> the latest release is 2009.08.
>> Am I in the wrong tree or what m
I would like to have some rescue boot, if flashing of
uboot-environment, kernel or filesystem fails.
My idea is to check a certain port (eth) for some time and if I
receive a defined string not to continue the ususal boot process but
execute some into uboot compiled bootcmds.
Looking into the code
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
thanks for your mail.
2010/6/8 Wolfgang Denk :
> Why should "flashing of uboot-environment" fail? If you configure for
> redundant environment, you should always at least have the previous
> copy of the settings).
Right, but what happens if user is doing something stupid?
I d
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Well, you can provide measures for a reset to a sane state, then.
This sounds even more complicated to me. In fact - I don't have any
clue, what and howto measure and reset the environment. This system
doesn't even had a reset buttom... so it is always a cold boot.
>> I don
Dear Albert,
2010/6/9 Albert ARIBAUD :
> If the user is able to do something stupid then you should avoid it, e.g.
> not give the user the ability to alter the u-boot environment by making it
In fact, the normal user doesn't have access to change it. But even I
can make faults.
> You should cons
A short question to handling of bad blocks:
My nand shows a few bad blocks (example 10)
What is happen when I write / read from that block via nand write / read.
Is content than ok (by mapping good blocks do that address)?
Other way around - if I have commands like
"get_kn=nand read.i 0x8000
2010/6/23 Scott Wood :
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 02:40:51PM +0200, Arno Steffen wrote:
>> A short question to handling of bad blocks:
>> My nand shows a few bad blocks (example 10)
>>
>> What is happen when I write / read from that block via nand write / read.
>&g
2010/6/24 Scott Wood :
> On 06/24/2010 01:28 AM, Arno Steffen wrote:
>>
>> does it mean in other words - I don't have to care for the bad block,
>> can write on the bad block address as it would be ok?
>
> You can't write directly to that block, but it can
2010/6/25 Scott Wood :
> On 06/25/2010 05:18 AM, Arno Steffen wrote:
>>
>> 2010/6/24 Scott Wood:
>>>
>>> On 06/24/2010 01:28 AM, Arno Steffen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> does it mean in other words - I don't have to care for the bad bl
I am using Teraterm to transfer the uboot environment to the system.
I do get strange effects that not all commands are executed properly.
It is looking like this:
while the tranfer file contains:
set boot_nfs_nand 'set bootargs ${bootargs_fs}; run addip;
tftpboot 0x8000 spv/uImage; bo
Sorry another question to that.
As for instance I want to have 10MB for root partion and keep 2 blocks
extra as reserve for some bad blocks.
I will erase the hole 10MB+2block, write 10MB. That's what I do in uboot.
But in Kernel I have some partition table like this:
{
.name
43 matches
Mail list logo
