On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 18:21, Adrian Torregrosa <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > After reverting back to 2023.07 on the Banana Pi M64 I booted and repeated the dd command. Before rebooting I took the time to read back from the MMC and compare its SHA256 checksum with that of the file /usr/share/uboot/bananapi_m64/u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin and that that appears in https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/fileinfo?rpmID=39921997&filename=/usr/share/uboot/bananapi_m64/u-boot-sunxi-with-spl.bin, and the three matched. > > Then I rebooted and the boot process completed successfully. So it completed successfully on the Banana Pi M64? > One difference I observed was that when it failed it showed: So on a clean system that hasn't booted previously (with the feature) the OS hasn't updated the EFI entry. > *** U-Boot Boot Menu *** > > mmc 0 > whereas when it succeeded it showed > *** U-Boot Boot Menu *** > > Fedora > mmc 0 That's post boot where the UEFI entry was updated for the OS. > Besides, this error that appears when it failed: > error: ../../grub-core/disk/efi/efidisk.c:615:failure reading sector 0x1e6f80 from `hd0'. > might be a transient one, I'm not sure about that. That looks like a problem with an SD card, I wonder if there's a failed sector or something. > I can't say much more about why the upgrade failed on the Banana Pi the first time while it succeeded the second time. I'll see what I can find with the Orange Pi. Sometimes adding the following to the kernel command line can give you a bunch of very early boot debug output which may shed more of a light as to where the failure is "console=tty0 console=ttyS0,115200 earlycon uefi_debug earlyprintk=serial,ttyS0,115200 debug" Peter > BR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Adrian Torregrosa <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [fedora-arm] U-Boot 2024.10 testing > Date: 2024.09.03 17:08:18 > > On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 16:03, Adrian Torregrosa > <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The grub menu is reached in both cases. Then, the boot fails on the Banana Pi M64 just after a couple of seconds, whereas on the Orange Pi Zero Plus it simply does not complete the boot. > > > Please debug it rather than just going straight out and giving > negative karma because I don't believe U-Boot is the problem here, and > it's significantly better than the previous version.... > > BR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Adrian Torregrosa <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [fedora-arm] U-Boot 2024.10 testing > Date: 2024.09.03 16:49:21 > > On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 15:42, Adrian Torregrosa > <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello. > > I'm afraid the new release did not work for any of my two Allwinner devices. The dd commands went through of course but upon rebooting the devices failed to reach the login; please see the console outputs attached. > > > Those outputs look like I would expect for a working device, I would > expect the grub menu to come up shortly after that. What are you > seeing? > > Peter > > BR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Adrian Torregrosa <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [fedora-arm] U-Boot 2024.10 testing > Date: 2024.09.02 23:31:09 > > Hi Adrian, > > I created Bug 2309138 - Allwinner A64 devices fail to boot once their uboot gets upgraded to 2024.04. > > > So I think uboot-tools-2024.10-0.3.rc3.fc41 should fix the Allwinner > issues, if you could test it and provide karma on the update below > that would be fab. I tested it on my Pine64+ > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-dbf55dbc52 > > I upgraded mi Radxa Rock Pi E with the UBoot in the rc2 .rpm and as far as I can tell it works fine: > > U-Boot TPL 2024.10-rc2 (Aug 15 2024 - 00:00:00) > DDR3, 333MHz > BW=32 Col=10 Bk=8 CS0 Row=14 CS=1 Die BW=16 Size=512MB > Trying to boot from BOOTROM > Returning to boot ROM... > > U-Boot SPL 2024.10-rc2 (Aug 15 2024 - 00:00:00 +0000) > Trying to boot from MMC2 > ## Checking hash(es) for config config-1 ... OK > ## Checking hash(es) for Image atf-1 ... sha256+ OK > ## Checking hash(es) for Image u-boot ... sha256+ OK > ## Checking hash(es) for Image fdt-1 ... sha256+ OK > ## Checking hash(es) for Image atf-2 ... sha256+ OK > ## Checking hash(es) for Image atf-3 ... sha256+ OK > NOTICE: BL31: v2.10.4(release): > NOTICE: BL31: Built : 00:00:00, Jul 17 2024 > NOTICE: BL31:Rockchip release version: v1.2 > > > U-Boot 2024.10-rc2 (Aug 15 2024 - 00:00:00 +0000) > > Model: Radxa ROCK Pi E > DRAM: 512 MiB (effective 510 MiB) > PMIC: RK805 (on=0x40, off=0x01) > Core: 244 devices, 29 uclasses, devicetree: separate > MMC: mmc@ff500000: 1, mmc@ff520000: 0 > Loading Environment from MMC... Reading from MMC(1)... *** Warning - bad CRC, using default environment > > In: serial@ff130000 > Out: serial@ff130000 > Err: serial@ff130000 > Model: Radxa ROCK Pi E > Net: eth0: ethernet@ff540000 > Found DTB: rockchip/rk3328-rock-pi-e.dtb > Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110 > > *** U-Boot Boot Menu *** > > Fedora > mmc 1 > Exit > > > Press UP/DOWN to move, ENTER to select, ESC to quit > Booting: Fedora > Found DTB: rockchip/rk3328-rock-pi-e.dtb > ethernet@ff540000 Waiting for PHY auto negotiation to complete....... done > Speed: 1000, full duplex > . > . > . > > > > > Best regards. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Adrian Torregrosa <adrian.torregrosa@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [fedora-arm] U-Boot 2024.10 testing > Date: 2024.09.01 19:43:27 > > Hi Adrian, > > A couple of weeks ago I upgraded my Orange Pi Zero Plus and my Sinovoip Banana Pi M64, both of which are based on Allwinner 64, from F39 to F40. That went fine so after that I attempted upgrading their UBoots and that did not work: > > > I think I've got to the bottom of the issue, any chance you can do a > F-41 bug report for me? Link below should go straight there for you. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&version=41&component=uboot-tools > > So I reverted back to U-Boot SPL 2023.07. > > This afternoon I tried upgrading the Banana Pi to this rc2 version and the result was quite similar: > > > Yup, it's the same. > > For the record, I was able to upgrade my Raspberry Pi 3B's and my Radxa Rock Pi E's UBoots to 2024.04. > > > What about to the 2024.10 RC builds in F-41? You can use the F-41 > U-Boot without having to upgrade the OS. Mostly interested in the > RockPi as I can test the RPi3. > > Thanks, > Peter > > Best regards. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > To: arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [fedora-arm] U-Boot 2024.10 testing > Date: 2024.08.16 12:45:29 > > Hi Folks, > > I've started building the 2024.10 RCs in F-41+ so it would be great to > get some testing. > > I found that at least the Allwinner a64 devices looked like they > regressed in F-40 and I've tested the Pine64+ with the rc2 build and I > think they should be OK now. > > It would be great if people could test and provide some feedback on > these builds as we go towards F-41 beta freeze. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2530785 > > Peter > > > > > -- _______________________________________________ arm mailing list -- arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
