<naobsd>
pacopad: do you have any experience with mainline?
<pacopad>
I had experience with allwinner a20 kernel compilation , not sure it was mainline
Avagetto2 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<naobsd>
pacopad: generally "mainline kernel" is not "Android kernel", you have to understand this first
<naobsd>
(I'm still not sure what you expect from "Android kernel", I assumed it's kernel to run Android OS)
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
<pacopad>
yes it’s that
<pacopad>
i build an android os and i want to update the kernel cause i got network ethernet problems
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<pacopad>
on rk3288 board
<naobsd>
anyway, answer for "is it possible to build an Android kernel with your sources ?" is no, because it's "mainline kernel", not "Android kernel".
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
<pacopad>
ok thank you for anwser , i got also my problem with linux and mainline kernel maybe you’ll have an idea on my perf problems
<pacopad>
with iperf io got only 2Mbps with negociated at 100/full
Avagetto2 has joined #linux-rockchip
<pacopad>
1000/full sorry
<pacopad>
when i force 100/full i obtain 90Mbps
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Avagetto2 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
nashpa has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
nashpa has joined #linux-rockchip
<rperier>
hi all
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
field^Mop has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto2 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
levd1 has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<Astralix1>
Hi all
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Avagetto1 has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has quit [Client Quit]
Avagetto1 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<ganbold_>
naobsd: so even though I put CONFIG_BOOTDELAY in include/configs/rk*, it doesn't stop. It stopped before doing fastboot -i 0x2207 oem unlock
<naobsd>
pacopad: mainline kernel on firefly? which driver are you using?
<naobsd>
ganbold_: put CONFIG_BOOTDELAY? there is CONFIG_BOOTDELAY 0 in rk32plat.h, I think you should modify it
<naobsd>
ganbold_: btw what do you want with it?
tizbac_ is now known as tizbac
<pacopad>
@naobsd : i dont have compiled it myself, it’s the kernel shipped with the ubuntu version
ganbold_ has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<naobsd>
pacopad: it's not "mainline linux"
ganbold_ has joined #linux-rockchip
<ganbold_>
naobsd: I want to stop at boot prompt and issue commands like dcachec off, dcache flush
<jmcneill>
naobsd, yes 0x80000000 for kern base phys, see CUBIETRUCK kernel config
<tizbac>
naobsd, i've got the kernel from the manufacter of various tablets
<tizbac>
i'm still downloading it, if you want i can give you the link to it to see if it can be usefuk
field^Mop has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<jmcneill>
naobsd: for sd stability issues, try a non-MP kernel, I think something is wrong with cortex-a9 code
<ganbold_>
naobsd: even though I modified CONFIG_BOOTDELAY in rk32plat.h it is not stopping, maybe this is because fastboot unlock
<ganbold_>
naobsd: before fastboot unlock it stopped
<jmcneill>
hi ganbold
<ganbold_>
hi
FreezingAlt is now known as FreezingCold
field^Mop has joined #linux-rockchip
Avagetto has joined #linux-rockchip
FreezingCold has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
FreezingCold has joined #linux-rockchip
cnxsoft1 has quit [Quit: cnxsoft1]
<jmcneill>
ganbold, apart from rk30xx_mp.c was there anything else you had to do for mp spinup?
<ganbold_>
jmcneill: no
<ganbold_>
jmcneill: I mean that was the only one I did
<jmcneill>
must be something funky with cortex a9 support in netbsd head then
<ganbold_>
iirc a7 had some problem in netbsd, I think was it nick fixed something
cosm has joined #linux-rockchip
jas-hacks has joined #linux-rockchip
<jmcneill>
yep it was a7
<jmcneill>
no problems on those (a20/a31/a80)
<jmcneill>
well, a80 has some problems, but i think gic related
<ganbold_>
how is it going except smp?
<jmcneill>
i wrote some code to scale up cpu freq and it seems to work except it breaks sdmmc
<jmcneill>
any attempt to debug it unbreaks sdmmc
<jmcneill>
driving me crazy
<ganbold_>
no progress today for me, wanted to disable dcache in u-boot but it is not stopping with boot delay defined, strange
<ganbold_>
anyhow will check that tomorrow
<Astralix1>
hi gangbold
<Astralix1>
do you use 3288 or 3188?
<ganbold_>
3288
<Astralix1>
I do have a uboot built that stops countdown
<ganbold_>
Astralix1: does it have fastboot feature?
<Astralix1>
let me check
<ganbold_>
once I unlocked in fastboot it is not stopping anymore
<Astralix1>
I moved to a new account on a different machine, so still fetching and collecting everything
<Astralix1>
ah
<Astralix1>
ok, I see
<Astralix1>
so enable fastboot does break contdown?
<Astralix1>
which board? firefly?
<ganbold_>
yes
nighty^ has joined #linux-rockchip
<ganbold_>
I think after oem unlock
<Astralix1>
Ok, haven't seen this option yet, but I just had a quir run through to enable the console
<Astralix1>
quick
<ganbold_>
like these
<ganbold_>
fastboot -i 0x2207 oem unlock
<ganbold_>
fastboot -i 0x2207 oem unlock_accept
<Astralix1>
what does they do?
<ganbold_>
enable loading/booting kernel from fastboot
<jas-hacks>
anyone know which kernel code attempts to load 'rk30xxnand_ko'
<Astralix1>
rk30xxnand.ko is loaded by init script
<Astralix1>
it is not loaded by the kernel itself
<jas-hacks>
Astralix1: ah, ok
<Astralix1>
you need to add that file and the loading line to your init or initrc in initrd (initial ramdisk) that you add to the kernel when creating a boot.img
<Astralix1>
gangbold_: unfortunately I need to repair user / group permissions on the local clone of the firefly repo first... takes a minute
<bbelos>
Astralix1: i have an rk3188 tablet. do you know if it's at all possible to get uart serial output from the mini usb port?
<Astralix1>
Never saw this working
<bbelos>
ok, thanks
<Astralix1>
most tablets have dedicated testpins for uart access and you need to find them, solder a low volatage capable adapter to it and then can access it from USB
<bbelos>
yeah, was hoping to not have to do that :)
<bbelos>
attempting to get a kernel compiled for it. still trying to figure out which base to start with
field^Mop has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
<Astralix1>
That is pretty difficult, if you do not have the exact working kernel sources
<bbelos>
yeah, i know
<Astralix1>
To get the kernel working, you probably need serial conssole...
<Astralix1>
hehe
<bbelos>
:)
<bbelos>
i have cyanogenmod running well enough with the stock kernel. just wanted to take on the extra challenge
<Astralix1>
I made a little case mod to my tablets to add a 3-pole pinheader
<Astralix1>
Does anyone know, why samba is constantly dropping out on radxa lubuntu image?
<Astralix1>
I see, that you got a kernel log... from serial port?
<bbelos>
Astralix1: last_kmsg actually. rebooted into recovery to get it
mrcan_ has joined #linux-rockchip
<Astralix1>
That is probably not enough, as you need to find out all the hardware around the tablet.
<bbelos>
yeah, but it's a big step having an active ramconsole
cosm has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
mrcan has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
mrcan_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
mrcan__ has joined #linux-rockchip
McBitter has joined #linux-rockchip
<McBitter>
ohi - anyone been tampering with maskrom recently?
<McBitter>
over OTG
<Astralix1>
how to tamper with maskrom over otg?
<McBitter>
nah - just trying to get maskrom to play nicely
<McBitter>
to write data to nand
<McBitter>
data is sent to maskrom over usb control
<McBitter>
with bmrequesttype = 0x40 and then the magic brequest 0xC (something to do with flashing) and wValue 0x0000
<McBitter>
it's a pity that TRM doesn't document it
<Astralix1>
McBitter... I would strongly reccomend you to read some basic facts about the mask rom and other involved loaders in the startup prcess of the SOC
<Astralix1>
The MASK ROM ist only able to detect an SRAM loader image at certain positions of the supported boot medias.
<Astralix1>
It the loads this tiny little piece of code to init SRAM and enable some media features for the rest of the loader
<Astralix>
I only have 31xx/32xx boards for development. The 3066 is a tablet that uses a very ugly setup... I never did sucessfully setup a kernel for it
<McBitter>
oh
<McBitter>
btw I did find some USB setup routine in bootrom
<McBitter>
but got stuck due to no info :D
<Astralix>
The so-called sources for it where completely different from what the kernel showed me in IDA.
<Astralix>
The kernel ini IDA shows that the DC/DC for core, gpu and some others are driven by RK-PWM units
<McBitter>
I that TRM has all the missing data
<McBitter>
power, CRU
<McBitter>
secure state
<Astralix>
McBitter, we should collect them and make them available... But I cannot do that for some certain reasons...
<McBitter>
hate lawyers?
<Astralix>
That would probably be difficult. But it helps the community more if RK continues to talk to me as kind as they do till now... So I will not take any actions that change this
<McBitter>
you can talk with RK? :O
<McBitter>
since when these chinese fellas got smart
<McBitter>
opening docs == more sales in chips
<Astralix>
That is not exactly true, as they have the same problem with each other as we have with them... If you open your docs, the company accross the streets manufactures a copy of you product next week too
<McBitter>
I don't really understand all the secrecy there
<McBitter>
hmmm
<Astralix>
And it is not different if you check docs from TI, Freesscale or others
<McBitter>
TRM isn't really a fabrication process
<Astralix>
Check the docs
<Astralix>
It exactly lists the setup of addresses and layouts of register files by IP
<Astralix>
So you can figure out the IPs and then you buy the ARM cor and the IPs and glue them together
<McBitter>
oh good point
<Astralix>
There are not many things really new and designed by rockchip themselfes
<McBitter>
I wonder why people even bother then?
<McBitter>
just make the darn silicon
<Astralix>
And that is one of the reasons that there is some closed source
<Astralix>
They bought the right to use the IP, but not to open the IP to public
<McBitter>
I have my eyes on parallella chips too
<Astralix>
Or the IP supports codecs that are licened
<McBitter>
so it's not really in the hands of RK to make it open?
<Astralix>
Yes, with some critical things it is not in the hands of RK
<Astralix>
Unfortunately all of HW-decoding and 2D/3D grafix
<Astralix>
The encryption of the loader is a different thing
<Astralix>
If you cannot guarantee and verify that you can close and secure the whole boot process right up into chromeOS orAndroid, you will not be certified by google
<Astralix>
But without certification, you are not allowed to sell you products with Google apps installed
<Astralix>
Without that, you will not be selected as SOC manufacturers by many many OEMs
<McBitter>
wat
<McBitter>
I just started to hate companies once again
<McBitter>
so it's up to the community to do the right thing
<McBitter>
where nobody can touch us under the flag of GPL
<Astralix>
For the Loader it doesn't really bother the open source thinng, as the existent loader is running and booting kernels.
<Astralix>
For 2D/3D it is up to ARM to give more than only a bit of Android support libraries
<McBitter>
well yeah - but some of us like tho know what is running on the silicon
<McBitter>
especially one with GPS installed
<Astralix>
lol
<Astralix>
It would be a bit tricky to write a working GPS client that sends your location to a network and boots an encrypted system in less than 10kB of code...
<McBitter>
company I work for almost signed a contract with defence police (one that does counter intelligence) so yeah... I have my issues
<Astralix>
If you can this going, forward your application to certain services and you will be hired for the rest of your life with a pretty good income
<McBitter>
I'm already involved in military cyber defence so um yea...
<Astralix>
So you should know about the needs of GPS
<McBitter>
gov already has my butt
<McBitter>
GPS client isn't that big btw
<karlp>
depends what the hw is spitting out :)
<Astralix>
Hmm... I started programming GPS things on Z80 some... ah... when was GPS set productive?
<Astralix>
I must have a real Rockwell developer kit flying around somwhere that is almost 20 years old...
<McBitter>
wat
<McBitter>
I'm almost as old as that kit then
<Astralix>
:)
<McBitter>
new year's eve will be watching monitors - oh well
<Astralix>
Somwhere in the mid 1980s it was activated, I experimented with it in the naval services in the early 90s and continued to follow its development lateron
<Astralix>
Some time this year I was hacking around some Android code for unifying a GPS, Galileo, Baidu and GLONAS receiver driver... But Mediatek Code is so ugly...
<McBitter>
:D
dlezcano has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<McBitter>
I still don't understand - why ARM is so android oriented
<McBitter>
OEM's that produce silicon specially
<jmcneill>
$
<Astralix>
Oh, ARM is doing what they get the money for
<McBitter>
ISA and core designs
<Astralix>
But NVIDIA and ATI had to learn the hard way too, so I guess Vivante and ARM will follow
<McBitter>
elaborate?
<Astralix>
However, there are tendencies in RK that make life more easy, if the promises come true
<McBitter>
I've been away for half a year from civilation
<Astralix>
As you might know AMD (former ATI) actively supports kernel drivers and NVIDIA does too
<McBitter>
linus hates nvidia :D
<McBitter>
brb coffee
<Astralix>
ARM allows open source interface software to adapt the closed source drivers. ARM cannot write them alone as some things depend on the way of implementation in the final silicon. But ARM supports SOC builders in getting that code
<McBitter>
hmmmm
<McBitter>
confused
<McBitter>
only thing that changes is GPU core address afaik
<McBitter>
and core that is used, but that comes from who ever designed that IP
<McBitter>
ow and the RAM
<McBitter>
and data lines to outside world
<McBitter>
surely I forgot something
<McBitter>
anyway - you are refering to what exacly with this? Astralix
<McBitter>
currently I have AMD mantle in mind
<Astralix>
Hmm, there are discussions on the ARM forum at ARM.com
<Astralix>
I was just doing some rough walk through throught the issues and reasons for closed code
<McBitter>
closed source sucks - we all know that
<McBitter>
even more in supercomputing
<Astralix>
There are intentions of RK to support more open source structures
<McBitter>
because perfomance decrease is awful due to overhead
<Astralix>
yes
<McBitter>
have you seen what CUDA has become?
<McBitter>
so much overhead
<Astralix>
lol
<McBitter>
openCL ain't any better due to abstractions :D
<McBitter>
oh snap - we got too far from arm
<Astralix>
This is not my home... I prefer to stay at hardware-software interface and I really prefer to stay in C99 or assembler
<McBitter>
C2011 is out ;)
<McBitter>
and I gotta stay where I'm told to :D
<McBitter>
learn fast or die
<Astralix>
hehe...
<McBitter>
been the moto for last few years
<Astralix>
sure
<karlp>
what is really useful and nice in c11? c++11 has heaps for c++ people, but for plain c?
<McBitter>
from soldering work to low level to super computing to signal analysis
<Astralix>
I didn't say I don't know, I just stated that I prefer
<McBitter>
C++ is awful for low level
<McBitter>
too many exeption cases n what not
<McBitter>
personally I'm starting to like rust language
<Astralix>
With C++ and higher you never now what the code will do if you not cover exactly every exception. With C99 it can only do, what you wrote
<McBitter>
C++ does way too many things in background
<McBitter>
hopefully rust will be new era in computing
<Astralix>
And if you can at least read anough assembly to get a rough overview, what the compiler did with your code, you can really efficiently program a device
<McBitter>
know what's funny - I can say that I know C, but that is not the case with C++
<McBitter>
that beast does many unexpected things
<Astralix>
For writing HW/SW interface things like drivers, there is no alternative to C except assembly.
<McBitter>
in the future prob rust too
<McBitter>
since it's aimed at systems programming
<McBitter>
but damn - that compiler is pain... strict syntax so that fewer errors can appear
<karlp>
hrm, I've seen some very lovely c++ recently for embedded, but it's using c++11 features, and it requires care and art,
<McBitter>
stdlib is already huge for low level work anyway
<McBitter>
one of the reasons for C
<karlp>
you don't need to use stdlib just because you're using c++....
<McBitter>
true, but then you might as well use C :D
<karlp>
or, you haven't seen the use of c++ perhaps :)
<karlp>
anyway, I digress, I was asking what was in c11 that was worth looking at
<McBitter>
I measure code by number of ASM lines :D
* karlp
replies by refusing to reply
<McBitter>
most stuff about C11 is in wiki
<McBitter>
that's more or less useful
<Astralix>
The best language really prefers on what you need to do and what you prefer
<Astralix>
There is no one-and-only thing
<karlp>
what?! no one true path to righteousness?! This is the internet!
<Astralix>
With C and Cortex you can almost stay completely away from assembly
<karlp>
of course there are global truths!
<Astralix>
karlp, the only truth is, that there is more than one truth
<McBitter>
Astralix: Cortex as in core family?
* karlp
observes, the force is wise in this one.
<karlp>
McBitter: one of the banner points of cortex is that you can right startup code in C.
<Astralix>
I use a lot Cortex M series chips and you can start the without any line of assembly code
<karlp>
asm not required! get your coder monkey's cheaper than ever!
<karlp>
Astralix: the shame is the vendors that still ship example startup code in asm :(
<Astralix>
I bet this can be done with Cortex A series too, but I never tested it
<McBitter>
but but I'm in love with ASM :(
<McBitter>
all those high perfomance functions
<Astralix>
If you know how to read ASM you can program C much more efficiently if you check your compilers results once in a while
<McBitter>
I usually trust the optimizer
<McBitter>
that fella does magic
<Astralix>
If you know how it works, you do write C code that is nearly as efficient as it is in assembler
<McBitter>
C with optimizer can be faster than hand written
<McBitter>
with generic registers
<McBitter>
not the case with NEON / VFP
<McBitter>
anyway - I'm in love with CoreSight tech
<Astralix>
Yes, there are always exceptions and excuses but again, once in a while, sit back, write some loops and cases and check the results, the try other ways to achieve the same result and check again and wonder...
<McBitter>
benchmarking heaven
<karlp>
Astralix: only need to do that it if doesn't already meet the performance goals :)
<McBitter>
Astralix: you are saying that ASM loop is faster than C?
<Astralix>
No...
<McBitter>
with max optimizer
<Astralix>
No
<Astralix>
A system can only optimize if it exactly understands what you do with your code
<Astralix>
But these optimizers can only guess according some rules
<Astralix>
They cannot look into your brain and optimize from what you think your code needs to do
<McBitter>
loops can be very complex :/
<Astralix>
Often it is enough to exchange a loop while( x++ < 5) {} by something like x=5; while (x--) {}
<karlp>
but I hate people who right things in weird formats and can't show the docs where they recorded the compiler making a bad choice first
<karlp>
who _write_ things
<Astralix>
??
<McBitter>
Astralix: people rarely write stuff like you do :D
<Astralix>
Ok, I perfer code that is written in a way that keeps it readable
<McBitter>
optimization is magic
<Astralix>
But in the above example, if you use it as it is, the optimizer will make a 2-liner from it
<Astralix>
So it doesn't matter
<McBitter>
from both?
<Astralix>
Probably yes
<McBitter>
due to awesomness of ARM conditional instructions
<karlp>
test first, iff it has a performance implication that matters
<Astralix>
Yes
<Astralix>
But if you use the x inside the loop, the magic is over and the two will differ completely
pacopad has quit [Quit: pacopad]
<Astralix>
in the first example it will load x, substract 5 and jump on overrun
<Astralix>
in the second example it will just load x and jump on zero
<Astralix>
probably it will only test and jump on zero without making a register dirty, not sure if A9 has such a feature
<McBitter>
what feature exacly?
<Astralix>
So, if the thing you do with x in the loop can be done from 0...4 as well as from 4...0, choose the second way as this spares some calculations every loop
<jmcneill>
anybody familiar with rk3188 mmc controller?
<Astralix>
to test a variable for beeing </=/>= 0 without really loading it
<Astralix>
jmcneill, hopefully a bit
<McBitter>
interesting features
<McBitter>
I should dig more into belly of a core
<Astralix>
As I told, I am not sure if such commands are available.
<McBitter>
instructions or features? :D
<jmcneill>
Astralix, without dma, polling for fifo ready by looking at fifo cnt and/or fifo count fields, i seem to be getting corrupt data
<jmcneill>
been driving me crazy all day
<Astralix>
which driver do you try to use?
<jmcneill>
one I'm writing for netbsd
<Astralix>
isn't there any existing netbsd dwmmc driver available?
<jmcneill>
i wrote it
<Astralix>
cause you probably only need to handle a few exceptions
<jmcneill>
started to see issues after I wrote SMP spinup code
<jmcneill>
so went back to UP, and wrote CPU freq setting code, and then the issues started appearing in UP mode
<Astralix>
are you sure you have an issue with dwmmc itself?
<jmcneill>
not entirely
<Astralix>
Cause SD/MMC is very layout and frequency critical
<jmcneill>
AHB is 48MHz on RK3188?
<jmcneill>
which is parent for MMC0 correct?
<Astralix>
I have seen many boards where the termination was completely wrong and you can only access with <12MHz
<Astralix>
the only person that can answer this question fully true, is mmind00
<Astralix>
Let me check if I find the document
<jmcneill>
Other odd thing. Datasheet says PWREN=1 to enable power, but it seems to be the reverse?
<Astralix>
There had been several issues with dwmmc itself
<Astralix>
even it got better compared to older freescale implementations
<mmind00>
Astralix: which question do you mean? There is a bit to much backlog right now :-)
<Astralix>
the exact clock path of the dwmmc IP
<Astralix>
SDMMC and SDIO are clocked by PERI_HCLK
<Astralix>
and PERI_HCLK is coming from PERI_ACLK through a divider
<Astralix>
and PERI_ACLK is coming from PERI_PLL_CLK through a second divider
<mmind00>
yep
<Astralix>
looks like the document is correct at that path
<mmind00>
personally I'd suggest looking at drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3188.c in a recent mainline kernel, as the whole clock structure is quite readable there
<jmcneill>
mostly looking for confirmation that it should be getting 48MHz input
<Astralix>
jmcneill, 48MHz is correct
<jmcneill>
thanks
<Astralix>
For the clocks you can check eMMC specification 4.41 from JEDEC (jedec.org)
<Astralix>
50MHz is allowed for the IP, but the clock chains only support a rate of ~48MHz
<jmcneill>
Yeah I'm pretty sure at this point that the clocks are setup correctly.
<Astralix>
so you might have to drop speed by board setup
<Astralix>
I have seen some boards where no or wrong termination resistors where soldered to the signals of SD/MMC
cosm has joined #linux-rockchip
<Astralix>
Ok, have to leave for bed now. c'ya tomorrow guys
akaizen_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
akaizen has joined #linux-rockchip
McBitter has quit [Quit: Page closed]
<jmcneill>
Astralix, thanks for that -- I'm able to boot now at 1.6GHz UP with MMC at 24MHz. Now to try SMP kernel.
<naobsd>
I think 24MHz is better for first trial
<jmcneill>
hi naobsd
<jmcneill>
apart from strange data_abort_handler messages when spawning init, smp seems ok now too