On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:20:32PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > 在 2021-10-29星期五的 11:53 +0100,Andre Przywara写道: > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:29:10 -0400 > > Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 03:06:58PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > please pull the second sunxi PR for the 2021.10 merge window. > > > > I decided to merge most of Samuel's rework and some smaller > > > > patches that > > > > pave the way for more DM transitions and for accommodating the > > > > RISC-V SoC > > > > in the future. Merging them now gives us the opportunity to get > > > > some wider > > > > testing, since those subtle changes tend to break things. > > > > > > > > Compile-tested for all 159 sunxi boards, boot-tested on Pine64- > > > > LTS > > > > and OrangePi Zero. > > > > > > > > Summary: > > > > - Add and enable watchdog driver > > > > - Prepare for SYSRESET driven AXP poweroff > > > > - Prepare for SoCs without MMC2 > > > > - Some fixes for extending SPL (SPL-DM for RISC-V) > > > > - Some preparations for proper VBUS management > > > > - Fix secure monitor move > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andre > > > > > > > > ================================================ > > > > The following changes since commit > > > > 355d1e24f6143c4839be3c015c191421c4e9449c: > > > > > > > > Merge > > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-spi (2021-10-23 > > > > 10:49:28 -0400) > > > > > > > > are available in the Git repository at: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-sunxi.git master > > > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to > > > > c846fe43f0561311eb7261b34023a04646cdbd0d: > > > > > > > > mmc: sunxi: conditionally include MMC2 initialization code > > > > (2021-10-25 14:54:57 +0100) > > > > > > > > > > So first, up, this is now applied to u-boot/master. > > > > Many thanks, and sorry for the late push! > > > > > Next, I dug out my original Kickstarted Pine A64 board (as it's the > > > only > > > sunxi platform I have), and I see it's detected with 1GB memory and > > > as > > > Pine64+ which seems wrong, with the pine64_plus_defconfig (which is > > > what > > > I thought handled all of the A64 platforms). > > > > For the naming: There are three SKUs for the original Pine A64 board: > > - Pine A64: 512 MB with 100Mbit Ethernet PHY, lacking display and > > camera > > connectors (rare, mostly to meet the original 15 USD price tag) > > - Pine A64+ 1GB: 1GB DRAM with 1Gbit Ethernet PHY, with all > > connectors > > - Pine A64+ 2GB: 2GB DRAM with 1Gbit Ethernet PHY, with all > > connectors > > You can check whether your board is non-Plus or Plus 1G by the model of > the Ethernet PHY (non-Plus has RTL8201) or not soldered FPC connectors. > They do share a PCB design. Plus 2G is a dedicated PCB design as it > needs to use 4x 512MB DRAM chips.
OK, mine has an RTL8211E and is 1G for sure now that I look harder at it. On a related note, this board will draw power via the UART, is there any easy HW change I can do, to fix that? It's otherwise a lot harder to put this in to my CI lab. > > Also note that for those first boards from Pine64 the name of the > > company (Pine64) is sometimes uses for the boards as well ("Pine64 > > board"), even though this should be "Pine A64 board from Pine64". > > That > > is somewhat reflected in the defconfig name. In hindsight the > > defconfig > > should have been named more "pine-a64_defconfig", but I guess this is > > too late now? I see a lot of inconsistencies in naming, especially > > regarding capitalisation and dashes vs. underscores, check > > configs/[bB]anana* for instance, but probably renaming causes more > > harm > > than good? > > > > So I guess you have the middle one (the most common among the first > > wave), so that all seems correct? We differentiate between the non- > > plus > > and plus version at runtime, by the amount of DRAM detected, so > > that's > > pretty reliable. The 1GB and 2GB are otherwise the same, so same DT. > > The actual non-plus versions are somewhat rare, I guess most people > > just added the 4(!) bucks to get more RAM and Gigabit Ethernet. > > > > > I've not booted this up in > > > forever, and Armbian (the first binary I grabbed) does this as well > > > with > > > v2020.10 (and I'm using the same TF-A rev of 87311b4) so maybe the > > > answer is I should just e-waste this board and pick up something > > > else? > > > > Not sure exactly why? Is there anything that's broken, apart from the > > presumed misnaming? I would be happy to hear about any issues you > > have, > > in my experience those "outsider" inputs are very useful (I am far > > too > > familiar with all those tiny quirks). > > When U-Boot starts, UEFI boot should work out of the box, just pop a > > generic arm64 Debian/SuSE/Fedora/Ubuntu EFI installer USB stick in, > > should work even with HDMI and USB keyboard. Ah, so Armbian is a fails to boot (I can't even interrupt autoboot). Given that I was previously sure I had the 512MB model (but, I was wrong) I thought maybe this is just garbage now. But! Now that I'm pretty sure this is being seen right, I'm going to grab a different distribution and see what happens. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature