[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(
From: |
Stuart Hughes |
Subject: |
Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-( |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:42:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080707) |
Hi Tim,
Could I suggest to you both that you keep the dialog on the list, or at
least summarise the issue/resolution when you're done. That way
everyone can benefit, which is the purpose of the public forum.
Regards, Stuart
Tim Nelson wrote:
> My apologies for the silence on my behalf. I've been working with Kevin
> directly on some of the issues I'm having. It turns out the kernel produced
> by my LTIB was not valid. So, I'm past that and working on other problems.
> I've been doing ARM stuff for some time now and this has got to be the most
> troublesome board to get up and running :-).
>
> --Tim
>
> ----- "Stuart Hughes" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> I think Peter is on the right track. My suspicion is that the kernel
>> is
>> overwriting itself when it gets uncompressed. The tftp address and
>> the
>> kernel run address look too close to me. The load address looks a
>> bit
>> odd to my, but Kevin can probably give a better answer. I think you
>> need to raise the tftp load address so that as it uncompresses the
>> kernel into it's target ram address, that does not overwrite the
>> image
>> being uncompressed.
>>
>> There's an article here that has a picture that helps to understand
>> this:
>> http://balau82.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/booting-linux-with-u-boot-on-qemu-arm/
>>
>> Unfortunately there's no set load addresses and all sorts of
>> complications depending on targets.
>>
>> Regards, Stuart
>>
>> Tim Nelson wrote:
>>> I tried your suggestion of doing a memory compare. Here are the
>> results:
>>> ---BEGIN---
>>> Phytec LPC3250 board
>>> Build date: Dec 4 2008 11:44:18
>>> Autoboot in progress, press any key to stop
>>>
>>> U-Boot 1.3.3 (May 15 2009 - 12:30:25)
>>>
>>> DRAM: 64 MB
>>> NAND: 32 MiB
>>> In: serial
>>> Out: serial
>>> Err: serial
>>> Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0
>>> uboot> tftpboot 0x80000000 uImage
>>> HW MAC address: 00:01:90:xx:xx:xx
>>> ENET:auto-negotiation complete
>>> ENET:Link status up
>>> ENET:FULL DUPLEX
>>> ENET:100MBase
>>> TFTP from server 172.16.23.44; our IP address is 172.16.23.91
>>> Filename 'uImage'.
>>> Load address: 0x80000000
>>> Loading: T
>> #################################################################
>>> ######################################################
>>> done
>>> Bytes transferred = 1737596 (1a837c hex)
>>> uboot> tftpboot 0x82000000 uImage
>>> HW MAC address: 00:01:90:xx:xx:xx
>>> ENET:auto-negotiation complete
>>> ENET:Link status up
>>> ENET:FULL DUPLEX
>>> ENET:100MBase
>>> TFTP from server 172.16.23.44; our IP address is 172.16.23.91
>>> Filename 'uImage'.
>>> Load address: 0x82000000
>>> Loading: T
>> #################################################################
>>> #####################################################
>>> done
>>> Bytes transferred = 1737596 (1a837c hex)
>>> uboot> cmp.b 0x80000000 0x82000000 0x1a837c
>>> Total of 1737596 bytes were the same
>>> ---END---
>>>
>>> So, it appears the DRAM is good, at least on the blocks tested...
>>>
>>> --Tim
>>>
>>> ----- "Kevin Wells" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>
>>>>> I feel I'm getting VERY close, but unfortunately still having
>>>> issues
>>>>> getting the board bootstrapped. Any thoughts?
>>>> You mentioned this was a new design earlier? Try writing a program
>> to
>>>> hammer SDRAM
>>>> to see if your SDRAM is having occasional data errors.
>>>>
>>>> You can also try lowering the system clocking a bit to see if the
>>>> error goes away.
>>>> If the issue does goes away, check your power supply for excessive
>>>> noise or voltage
>>>> drop while SDRAM is under load. Is S1L ported to your board?
>>>>
>>>> You can also try loading your kernel to 2 different locations in
>> SDRAM
>>>> and then
>>>> using the u-boot cmp command to make sure they match. If not, some
>>>> SDRAM debug
>>>> may be in order...
>>>>
>>>> uboot> tftpboot 0x80000000 uImage
>>>> HW MAC address: 00:01:90:00:C0:81
>>>> ENET:auto-negotiation complete
>>>> ENET:FULL DUPLEX
>>>> ENET:100MBase
>>>> TFTP from server 192.168.1.41; our IP address is 192.168.1.188
>>>> Filename 'uImage'.
>>>> Load address: 0x80000000
>>>> Loading:
>>>> #################################################################
>>>>
>>>> ###############################################################
>>>> done
>>>> Bytes transferred = 1877708 (1ca6cc hex)
>>>> uboot> tftpboot 0x82000000 uImage
>>>> HW MAC address: 00:01:90:00:C0:81
>>>> ENET:auto-negotiation complete
>>>> ENET:FULL DUPLEX
>>>> ENET:100MBase
>>>> TFTP from server 192.168.1.41; our IP address is 192.168.1.188
>>>> Filename 'uImage'.
>>>> Load address: 0x82000000
>>>> Loading:
>>>> #################################################################
>>>>
>>>> ###############################################################
>>>> done
>>>> Bytes transferred = 1877708 (1ca6cc hex)
>>>> uboot> cmp.b 0x80000000 0x82000000 0x1ca6cc
>>>> Total of 1877708 bytes were the same
>>>> uboot>
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Kevin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LTIB home page: http://ltib.org
>>>
>>> Ltib mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ltib
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LTIB home page: http://ltib.org
>
> Ltib mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ltib
>
- [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Tim Nelson, 2010/07/28
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Tim Nelson, 2010/07/28
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Tim Nelson, 2010/07/28
- RE: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Kevin Wells, 2010/07/29
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Tim Nelson, 2010/07/30
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Peter Barada, 2010/07/30
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Tim Nelson, 2010/07/30
- Re: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Peter Barada, 2010/07/30
- RE: [Ltib] Build success for LPC32xx target, kernel issues :-(, Kevin Wells, 2010/07/30