From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Subject: Re: OMAP baseline test results for v3.10-rc6 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 15:34:00 -0400 Message-ID: <51C9F0A8.1050607@ti.com> References: <20130625160243.GE22312@arwen.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:47886 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751505Ab3FYTdy (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 15:33:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Walmsley Cc: Felipe Balbi , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, hvaibhav@ti.com On 06/25/2013 02:20 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > + Vaibhav and Kevin > > Hi, > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:23:17AM +0000, Paul Walmsley wrote: >>> Boot to userspace: >>> FAIL ( 3/12): 37xxevm, am335xbone, am335xbonelt >> >> Paul, we have at least 2 different folks who can't reproduce your bone >> and bone black boot to userspace failures. I wonder how you're trying to >> boot them. >> >> Care to share your test scripts ? > > Sure... the methodology is completely open and has been posted in the > online logs since the first test cycle. (For some reason, almost no one > clicks through the test directory trees that I post online. Is this a > documentation issue? What can we do to make it easier for people to > explore this?) Well, another link never hurts the search results :) [snip] > Am certainly open to the idea that there's something wrong with the way > that I'm booting either of these. But AFAIK no one's been able to > identify exactly what it could be. I haven't had the time recently to > spend hours going through the various permutations, given all the other > breakage :-( BeagleBone-white has the additional complication that it is > not easy to automate, due to the way that power is delivered to the board, > so there is an extra dimension of difficulty there. Ah-ha, I reproduced your failure. If I make up a concat uImage + DTB, rather than pass them separately, it fails to boot. If you switch to mainline U-Boot (v2012.10 or later) you get support for separate image + dtb (v2013.04 gives you bootz and zImage support). v2013.04 will also work out of the box for BeagleBone-Black. And yeah, I feel your pain about power cycling BeagleBone-White. The QA folks here sent me one of the relay controllers they use, and I think Felipe is partial to one from phidgets. >> Also, if you could share the entire thing, we will add your scripts to >> our nightly tests as to try and avoid future regressions. > > It would be great to have TI folks running those tests, or something > similar to them! An early version of the test system has been shared with > a handful of folks, but it needs to be cleaned up further before broader > release. We've got "something similar", at least wrt boot tests. But since we use separate kernel + DT, we hadn't seen this problem. -- Tom