From: Chris C. <che...@ho...> - 2007-09-19 08:18:04
|
Hi all, I use os x and have been downloading and compiling the os x buildroot for some time. I have recently had some problems so I decided to download the Linux version of the buildroot. When I compared the two I found that the os x trunk is drastically out of date. The linux buildroot has new versions of almost every package I downloaded including important ones like linux and u-boot. Can anyone shed any light on this? I would really like these new versions however when I try to compile the linux buildroot it gives me too many errors. I recently managed to compile u-boot 1.2.0 from the linux buildroot however it was a very lengthy process and I am wondering if anyone knows weather the os x trunk will be updated any time soon? Chris |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-19 13:21:26
|
Hi- I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: ... Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length 0x00100000)...done ## Booting image at a2000000 ... Bad Magic Number I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and NetDuo MMC). Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! |
From: LachelnKind <Lac...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 13:25:36
|
I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot to the new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or something, and rebooted, it was fine.... jes...@ma... wrote: > > Hi- > > I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// > www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a > nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem > on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the > katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and > inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: > > ... > > Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length > 0x00100000)...done > ## Booting image at a2000000 ... > Bad Magic Number > > I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like > flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the > kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot > environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? > > I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and > NetDuo MMC). > > Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number-on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-19 13:29:16
|
Thanks. I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot to the new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or something, and rebooted, it was fine.... jes...@ma... wrote: > > Hi- > > I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// > www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a > nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem > on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the > katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and > inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: > > ... > > Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length > 0x00100000)...done > ## Booting image at a2000000 ... > Bad Magic Number > > I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like > flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the > kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot > environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? > > I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and > NetDuo MMC). > > Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number- on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ gumstix-users mailing list gum...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: LachelnKind <Lac...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 13:31:40
|
Yea sure, tho I just got to work, so I can't do it now... I won't be home till late tonight. If no one does a printenv for u before than, I will. I am using a basix400xm-bt board with a console-st board attached.... jes...@ma... wrote: > > Thanks. > I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some > environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you > could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 > environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that > I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) > > > On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: > > > I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot > to the > new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or something, and > rebooted, it was fine.... > > > > jes...@ma... wrote: >> >> Hi- >> >> I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// >> www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a >> nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem >> on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the >> katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and >> inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: >> >> ... >> >> Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length >> 0x00100000)...done >> ## Booting image at a2000000 ... >> Bad Magic Number >> >> I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like >> flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the >> kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot >> environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? >> >> I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and >> NetDuo MMC). >> >> Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number- > on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 > Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number-on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777487 Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
From: Chris C. <che...@ho...> - 2007-09-19 14:08:16
|
At what point do you do the printenv? I am running the exact same system and I keep getting bad magic numbers plus I have just upgraded from u-boot 1.1.4 to 1.2.0. I have tried just typing it in the GUM prompt boot when I type bootm I get the same message On 19/9/07 14:31, "LachelnKind" <Lac...@gm...> wrote: > > Yea sure, tho I just got to work, so I can't do it now... I won't be home > till late tonight. If no one does a printenv for u before than, I will. I am > using a basix400xm-bt board with a console-st board attached.... > > > jes...@ma... wrote: >> >> Thanks. >> I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some >> environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you >> could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 >> environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that >> I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) >> >> >> On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: >> >> >> I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot >> to the >> new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or something, and >> rebooted, it was fine.... >> >> >> >> jes...@ma... wrote: >>> >>> Hi- >>> >>> I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// >>> www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a >>> nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem >>> on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the >>> katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and >>> inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: >>> >>> ... >>> >>> Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length >>> 0x00100000)...done >>> ## Booting image at a2000000 ... >>> Bad Magic Number >>> >>> I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like >>> flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the >>> kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot >>> environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? >>> >>> I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and >>> NetDuo MMC). >>> >>> Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> --- >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gumstix-users mailing list >>> gum...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >>> >>> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number- >> on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 >> Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> - >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> >> |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-19 14:25:56
|
According to the Gumstix wiki (Uboot page) you're supposed to reboot (reset) from the GUM> prompt, anticipating use of a default environment. Then you're supposed to just issue a saveenv to fix the bad CRC / bad magic number ... doesn't work. I'm with you on this one. A bit more amplifying information as I've spent dozens of hours on this now: it seems that after following all instructions in flashing a new (1.2) U-boot, flashing a new File System, and flashing the kernal (uImage file) using katinstall / katload, the katinstall isn't "sticking". It says it's copying it from a2000000 to 000f0000, and a subsequent imi command indicates all is good in the memory location. A subsequent katload and bootm result in a successful kernel load. But on the first reboot, when the katload command is called by U-boot to copy from 000f0000 to a2000000, it seems to be corrupting the image. It's weird cuz nothing has changed -- unless the flash is bad -- but too many other people have this problem. Hopefully one of the Gumstix guys will ride in on a white horse here cuz I'm stumped!! On Sep 19, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Chris Cheshire wrote: At what point do you do the printenv? I am running the exact same system and I keep getting bad magic numbers plus I have just upgraded from u-boot 1.1.4 to 1.2.0. I have tried just typing it in the GUM prompt boot when I type bootm I get the same message On 19/9/07 14:31, "LachelnKind" <Lac...@gm...> wrote: > > Yea sure, tho I just got to work, so I can't do it now... I won't > be home > till late tonight. If no one does a printenv for u before than, I > will. I am > using a basix400xm-bt board with a console-st board attached.... > > > jes...@ma... wrote: >> >> Thanks. >> I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some >> environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you >> could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 >> environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that >> I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) >> >> >> On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: >> >> >> I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot >> to the >> new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or >> something, and >> rebooted, it was fine.... >> >> >> >> jes...@ma... wrote: >>> >>> Hi- >>> >>> I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// >>> www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a >>> nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem >>> on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the >>> katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and >>> inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: >>> >>> ... >>> >>> Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length >>> 0x00100000)...done >>> ## Booting image at a2000000 ... >>> Bad Magic Number >>> >>> I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like >>> flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the >>> kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot >>> environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? >>> >>> I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and >>> NetDuo MMC). >>> >>> Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- >>> --- >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gumstix-users mailing list >>> gum...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >>> >>> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number- >> on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 >> Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> - >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---- >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ gumstix-users mailing list gum...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: LachelnKind <Lac...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 15:32:08
|
Here are the exact steps I took to go from the old u-boot to the new one... GUM>loadb a2000000 kermit>send u-boot.bin kermit>connect GUM>protect off all GUM>era 1:0-1 GUM>cp.b a2000000 0 ${filesize} GUM>reset And after it came back up, i did saveenv jes...@ma... wrote: > > According to the Gumstix wiki (Uboot page) you're supposed to reboot > (reset) from the GUM> prompt, anticipating use of a default > environment. Then you're supposed to just issue a saveenv to fix the > bad CRC / bad magic number ... doesn't work. > > I'm with you on this one. > > A bit more amplifying information as I've spent dozens of hours on > this now: it seems that after following all instructions in flashing > a new (1.2) U-boot, flashing a new File System, and flashing the > kernal (uImage file) using katinstall / katload, the katinstall isn't > "sticking". It says it's copying it from a2000000 to 000f0000, and a > subsequent imi command indicates all is good in the memory location. > A subsequent katload and bootm result in a successful kernel load. > But on the first reboot, when the katload command is called by U-boot > to copy from 000f0000 to a2000000, it seems to be corrupting the > image. It's weird cuz nothing has changed -- unless the flash is bad > -- but too many other people have this problem. > > Hopefully one of the Gumstix guys will ride in on a white horse here > cuz I'm stumped!! > > > > On Sep 19, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Chris Cheshire wrote: > > At what point do you do the printenv? > > I am running the exact same system and I keep getting bad magic > numbers plus > I have just upgraded from u-boot 1.1.4 to 1.2.0. I have tried just > typing it > in the GUM prompt boot when I type bootm I get the same message > > > On 19/9/07 14:31, "LachelnKind" <Lac...@gm...> wrote: > >> >> Yea sure, tho I just got to work, so I can't do it now... I won't >> be home >> till late tonight. If no one does a printenv for u before than, I >> will. I am >> using a basix400xm-bt board with a console-st board attached.... >> >> >> jes...@ma... wrote: >>> >>> Thanks. >>> I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some >>> environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you >>> could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 >>> environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that >>> I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) >>> >>> >>> On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: >>> >>> >>> I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u-boot >>> to the >>> new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or >>> something, and >>> rebooted, it was fine.... >>> >>> >>> >>> jes...@ma... wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi- >>>> >>>> I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// >>>> www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a >>>> nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem >>>> on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the >>>> katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and >>>> inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>> Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length >>>> 0x00100000)...done >>>> ## Booting image at a2000000 ... >>>> Bad Magic Number >>>> >>>> I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like >>>> flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting the >>>> kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot >>>> environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? >>>> >>>> I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and >>>> NetDuo MMC). >>>> >>>> Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> -- >>>> --- >>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> gumstix-users mailing list >>>> gum...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number- >>> on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12777357 >>> Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> --- >>> - >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gumstix-users mailing list >>> gum...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---- >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gumstix-users mailing list >>> gum...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >>> >>> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Bad-Magic-Number-on-First-Reboot-tf4480972.html#a12779925 Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-19 15:41:56
|
Thanks. I did the same thing -- accounting for flashing from MMC instead of serial: GUM> fatload mmc 1 a2000000 u-boot.bin GUM> protect off all GUM> era 1:0-1 GUM> cp.b a2000000 0 ${filesize} GUM> reset When it reboots, it confirms it's using a default environment GUM> saveenv Then I load the new Filesystem (JFFS2) and Kernel (uImage). Then, katinstall 100000 and katload 100000, then bootm. Works fine (BUT ONLY THIS TIME). Log into Gumstix as root. Poke around. reboot. BAD MAGIC NUMBER It seems like U-boot's bootcmd sequence is somehow corrupting the kernel image in the katload / bootm that it does -- but the console output suggests it's doing the same thing as the commands I manually entered when flashing. Anyone know how to engage the Gumstix support guys directly?? On Sep 19, 2007, at 8:32 AM, LachelnKind wrote: Here are the exact steps I took to go from the old u-boot to the new one... GUM>loadb a2000000 kermit>send u-boot.bin kermit>connect GUM>protect off all GUM>era 1:0-1 GUM>cp.b a2000000 0 ${filesize} GUM>reset And after it came back up, i did saveenv jes...@ma... wrote: > > According to the Gumstix wiki (Uboot page) you're supposed to reboot > (reset) from the GUM> prompt, anticipating use of a default > environment. Then you're supposed to just issue a saveenv to fix the > bad CRC / bad magic number ... doesn't work. > > I'm with you on this one. > > A bit more amplifying information as I've spent dozens of hours on > this now: it seems that after following all instructions in flashing > a new (1.2) U-boot, flashing a new File System, and flashing the > kernal (uImage file) using katinstall / katload, the katinstall isn't > "sticking". It says it's copying it from a2000000 to 000f0000, and a > subsequent imi command indicates all is good in the memory location. > A subsequent katload and bootm result in a successful kernel load. > But on the first reboot, when the katload command is called by U-boot > to copy from 000f0000 to a2000000, it seems to be corrupting the > image. It's weird cuz nothing has changed -- unless the flash is bad > -- but too many other people have this problem. > > Hopefully one of the Gumstix guys will ride in on a white horse here > cuz I'm stumped!! > > > > On Sep 19, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Chris Cheshire wrote: > > At what point do you do the printenv? > > I am running the exact same system and I keep getting bad magic > numbers plus > I have just upgraded from u-boot 1.1.4 to 1.2.0. I have tried just > typing it > in the GUM prompt boot when I type bootm I get the same message > > > On 19/9/07 14:31, "LachelnKind" <Lac...@gm...> wrote: > >> >> Yea sure, tho I just got to work, so I can't do it now... I won't >> be home >> till late tonight. If no one does a printenv for u before than, I >> will. I am >> using a basix400xm-bt board with a console-st board attached.... >> >> >> jes...@ma... wrote: >>> >>> Thanks. >>> I've done saveenv, but that may be the problem -- I've saved some >>> environment variables that somehow aren't working. Any chance you >>> could do a printenv for me so I can see what a working U-boot 1.2 >>> environment is supposed to look like? Is it perhaps a problem that >>> I'm using Connex and not Verdex (i.e. working with a smaller flash?) >>> >>> >>> On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:25 AM, LachelnKind wrote: >>> >>> >>> I got a Bad Magic Number before too, after I went from the old u- >>> boot >>> to the >>> new one. Once I saved the environment, i think saveenv or >>> something, and >>> rebooted, it was fine.... >>> >>> >>> >>> jes...@ma... wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi- >>>> >>>> I've posted a longer description of my problem here: http:// >>>> www.nabble.com/Re%3A-BAD-MAGIC-NUMBER-p12770456.html but in a >>>> nutshell, I follow all the instructions for flashing the filesystem >>>> on the Gumstix wiki and it loads the kernel just fine following the >>>> katinstall / katload / bootm. After looging in as root and >>>> inspecting the filesystem, I issue a reboot and get the following: >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>> Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length >>>> 0x00100000)...done >>>> ## Booting image at a2000000 ... >>>> Bad Magic Number >>>> >>>> I'm sure it's a U-Boot configuration / environment thing -- like >>>> flash copy step preceding bootm (i.e. the bootcmd) is corrupting >>>> the >>>> kernel image. Does anyone have a bare-bones script or U-Boot >>>> environment to get it to boot the kernel properly? >>>> >>>> I'm using Buildroot v.1522 with U-Boot 1.2 on a Connex-400 (and >>>> NetDuo MMC). >>>> >>>> Thanks for your help. I'm dead in the water! |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2007-09-19 17:23:59
|
On Sep 19, 2007, at 8:41 AM, Jesse Lund wrote: > Then I load the new Filesystem (JFFS2) and Kernel (uImage). Then, > katinstall 100000 and katload 100000, then bootm. Works fine (BUT > ONLY THIS TIME). Log into Gumstix as root. Poke around. reboot. > BAD MAGIC NUMBER > > It seems like U-boot's bootcmd sequence is somehow corrupting the > kernel image in the katload / bootm that it does -- but the console > output suggests it's doing the same thing as the commands I manually > entered when flashing. > > Anyone know how to engage the Gumstix support guys directly?? Almost certainly, the rootfs thinks it's supposed to be able to write to the top of flash where your kernel uImage is. Did you load an older rootfs which thinks there are only 2 regions of flash {u-boot, rootfs} rather than three {u-boot, rootfs, uImage}? Can you re-load the uImage and rootfs, restore them to the flash, then boot again, and this time save the boot log. I'm particularly interested in the part where it's talking about flash partitions. Thanks C |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-20 01:45:11
Attachments:
GUM.rtf
|
Hi Craig, Thanks again for your help on this. I know it's a bit more than you asked for, but just so I could be sure I didn't make any silly mistakes, I started from scratch. Here's a play-by-play. Also attached is the "log" itself starting from the bootm command after flashing everything new. If the attachment doesn't come through, let me know and I'll repost this message via cut-and-paste. Starting from the top: 1. Download gumstix-buildroot 1522 2. Build platform is Ubuntu 7.0.4 3. Compiled from scratch, per http://docwiki.gumstix.org/Buildroot a. cd gumstix-buildroot b. make defconfig c. rm .config d. make (Option 11 for Target, etc) 4. Copied the following to MMC card a. root 5. Power up Gumstix with NetDuo-MMC & Console board U-Boot 1.2.0 (Sep 18 2007 - 19:27:15) - 400 MHz - 1522M *** Welcome to Gumstix *** DRAM: 64 MB Flash: 16 MB SMC91C1111-0 Can't overwrite "serial#" Can't overwrite "ethaddr" Net: SMC91C1111-0 Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 GUM> GUM> mmcinit Detected: 1014784 blocks of 512 bytes (495MB) MMC card. Vendor: Man 1f OEM ffff "MP " Date 12/2006 Product: 637539452 Revision: N/A GUM> fatls mmc 1 8273348 rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 925124 uimage 160680 u-boot.bin 3 file(s), 0 dir(s) GUM> GUM> fatload mmc 1 a2000000 u-boot.bin reading u-boot.bin 160680 bytes read GUM> protect off all Un-Protect Flash Bank # 1 .................................................................... ............ ................................................ done GUM> era 1:0-1 Erase Flash Sectors 0-1 in Bank # 1 .. done GUM> cp.b a2000000 0 ${filesize} Copy to Flash... done GUM> reset resetting ... U-Boot 1.2.0 (Sep 18 2007 - 19:27:15) - 400 MHz - 1522M *** Welcome to Gumstix *** DRAM: 64 MB Flash: 16 MB Using default environment SMC91C1111-0 Net: SMC91C1111-0 Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 GUM> GUM> saveenv Saving Environment to Flash... . done Un-Protected 1 sectors Erasing Flash... . done Erased 1 sectors Writing to Flash... done . done Protected 1 sectors GUM> GUM> mmcinit Detected: 1014784 blocks of 512 bytes (495MB) MMC card. Vendor: Man 1f OEM ffff "MP " Date 12/2006 Product: 637539452 Revision: N/A GUM> fatload mmc 1 a2000000 rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 reading rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 8273348 bytes read GUM> GUM> pro on 1:0-1 && jera all && cp.b a2000000 40000 ${filesize} Protect Flash Sectors 0-1 in Bank # 1 .. done Erase Flash Bank # 1 - Warning: 2 protected sectors will not be erased! .................................................................... ............ .............................................. done Copy to Flash... done GUM> GUM> fatload mmc 1 a2000000 uImage reading uImage 925124 bytes read GUM> imi ## Checking Image at a2000000 ... Image Name: uImage Image Type: ARM Linux Kernel Image (uncompressed) Data Size: 925060 Bytes = 903.4 kB Load Address: a0008000 Entry Point: a0008000 Verifying Checksum ... OK GUM> GUM> katinstall 100000 Copying kernel from 0xa2000000 to 0x00f00000 (length 0x00100000)...Erasing... ........ done Erased 8 sectors Writing...done GUM> katload 100000 Copying kernel to 0xa2000000 from 0x00f00000 (length 0x00100000)...done GUM> GUM>bootm From this point the attachment displays the output that you're looking for. |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2007-09-20 02:12:41
|
On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Jesse Lund wrote: > Dec 31 16:08:32 modprobe: WARNING: /etc/modprobe.conf line 39: > ignoring bad line starting with '-e' That also shows that you're suffering from the (ubuntu?) bug of having a bad /bin/sh which is linked to dash or something and doesn't grok the -e flag to echo. It could be that some related problem is causing the bad JFFS2 image to be built? C |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2007-09-20 02:10:41
|
On Sep 19, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Jesse Lund wrote: > Thanks again for your help on this. I know it's a bit more than > you asked for, but just so I could be sure I didn't make any silly > mistakes, I started from scratch. Here's a play-by-play. Also > attached is the "log" itself starting from the bootm command after > flashing everything new. Your procedure for doing the reflash looks OK (thought I don't know why you're doing a saveenv since you didn't change any of the environment variables, so there's no need to save that which hasn't been changed. But saving shouldn't matter) > If the attachment doesn't come through, let me know and I'll repost > this message via cut-and-paste. The attachment came through OK. > Creating 3 MTD partitions on "Gumstix Flash ROM": > 0x00000000-0x00040000 : "Bootloader" > 0x00040000-0x01f00000 : "RootFS" > 0x01f00000-0x02000000 : "Kernel" That's good, in the boot log -- shows that the kernel is properly setting up the 3 flash partitions which we want. > jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found at > 0x00ec0000: 0x0527 instead Those are not good though. > Old JFFS2 bitmask found at 0x00ed7a98 > You cannot use older JFFS2 filesystems with newer kernels That's not good either. I think there might be something odd going on with the way the JFFS2 rootfs is being generated in your buildroot or something. Can you make your JFFS2 image available somwhere that I can download it and try it out on known-good hardware? C |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-20 04:00:19
|
I've uploaded the JFFS2 rootfs to the following location: http://www.thinkbrc.com/transfer/rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 You can wget or just browse for it. When you say the following messages are "not good", can you elaborate? jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found at ... How can I eliminate these? Thanks again for your help!! On Sep 19, 2007, at 7:10 PM, Craig Hughes wrote: > Thanks again for your help on this. I know it's a bit more than > you asked for, but just so I could be sure I didn't make any silly > mistakes, I started from scratch. Here's a play-by-play. Also > attached is the "log" itself starting from the bootm command after > flashing everything new. Your procedure for doing the reflash looks OK (thought I don't know why you're doing a saveenv since you didn't change any of the environment variables, so there's no need to save that which hasn't been changed. But saving shouldn't matter) > If the attachment doesn't come through, let me know and I'll repost > this message via cut-and-paste. The attachment came through OK. > Creating 3 MTD partitions on "Gumstix Flash ROM": > 0x00000000-0x00040000 : "Bootloader" > 0x00040000-0x01f00000 : "RootFS" > 0x01f00000-0x02000000 : "Kernel" That's good, in the boot log -- shows that the kernel is properly setting up the 3 flash partitions which we want. > jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found at > 0x00ec0000: 0x0527 instead Those are not good though. > Old JFFS2 bitmask found at 0x00ed7a98 > You cannot use older JFFS2 filesystems with newer kernels That's not good either. I think there might be something odd going on with the way the JFFS2 rootfs is being generated in your buildroot or something. Can you make your JFFS2 image available somwhere that I can download it and try it out on known-good hardware? C |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2007-09-20 18:58:40
|
On Sep 19, 2007, at 9:00 PM, Jesse Lund wrote: > When you say the following messages are "not good", can you elaborate? > > jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found at ... > > How can I eliminate these? Well, those messages mean that when linux is trying to mount the rootfs, and JFFS2 is scanning all the nodes in the filesystem, it's finding bad nodes. That can mean a couple of possible things -- filesystem written onto un-erased flash (possibly due to hardware error in failing to erase) or bad filesystem image in the first place. How to eliminate them is the key to the whole question here :) I've just fetched your image to take a look at it now. C |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2007-09-20 19:29:23
|
On Sep 19, 2007, at 9:00 PM, Jesse Lund wrote: > I've uploaded the JFFS2 rootfs to the following location: > > http://www.thinkbrc.com/transfer/rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 I grabbed it and flashed it to a gumstix here. I used my own uImage (could you post yours and I'll check with that?) and it worked fine. As a test, could you do the following in u-boot: GUM> era 0x00ec0000 0x00f9ffff GUM> crc 0x00ec0000 0x000e0000 You should get CRC32 for 00ec0000 ... 00f9ffff ==> e48b6605 If you get some other number there, that means that the flash sectors aren't getting erased completely by u-boot, which might well indicate a hardware error in that region of flash on your board. C |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-21 00:38:04
|
Craig, I've posted the uImage to the same area, as you requested: http://www.thinkbrc.com/transfer/uImage I will do the flash-erase and crc checks now and report back.... Thanks for your help! On Sep 20, 2007, at 12:29 PM, Craig Hughes wrote: > I've uploaded the JFFS2 rootfs to the following location: > > http://www.thinkbrc.com/transfer/rootfs.arm_nofpu.jffs2 I grabbed it and flashed it to a gumstix here. I used my own uImage (could you post yours and I'll check with that?) and it worked fine. As a test, could you do the following in u-boot: GUM> era 0x00ec0000 0x00f9ffff GUM> crc 0x00ec0000 0x000e0000 You should get CRC32 for 00ec0000 ... 00f9ffff ==> e48b6605 If you get some other number there, that means that the flash sectors aren't getting erased completely by u-boot, which might well indicate a hardware error in that region of flash on your board. C |
From: Jesse L. <jes...@ma...> - 2007-09-21 01:27:41
|
Craig- Ok, I ran the flash erase and CRC check. Everything comes out as expected. See output below. Also, just for grins, I uploaded the u- boot.bin file too -- not sure if it's of any use to you or not. http://www.thinkbrc.com/transfer/u-boot.bin U-Boot 1.2.0 (Sep 18 2007 - 19:27:15) - 400 MHz - 1522M *** Welcome to Gumstix *** DRAM: 64 MB Flash: 16 MB SMC91C1111-0 Can't overwrite "serial#" Can't overwrite "ethaddr" Net: SMC91C1111-0 Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 GUM> mmcinit Detected: 1014784 blocks of 512 bytes (495MB) MMC card. Vendor: Man 1f OEM ffff "MP " Date 12/2006 Product: 637539452 Revision: N/A GUM> era 0x00ec0000 0x00f9ffff ....... done Erased 7 sectors GUM> crc 0x00ec0000 0x000e0000 CRC32 for 00ec0000 ... 00f9ffff ==> e48b6605 GUM> On Sep 20, 2007, at 12:29 PM, Craig Hughes wrote: > As a test, could you do the following in u-boot: > > GUM> era 0x00ec0000 0x00f9ffff > GUM> crc 0x00ec0000 0x000e0000 > > > You should get > > CRC32 for 00ec0000 ... 00f9ffff ==> e48b6605 |
From: Dave H. <dhy...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 15:14:40
|
Hi Chris, > I use os x and have been downloading and compiling the os x buildroot for > some time. I have recently had some problems so I decided to download the > Linux version of the buildroot. When I compared the two I found that the os > x trunk is drastically out of date. The linux buildroot has new versions of > almost every package I downloaded including important ones like linux and > u-boot. > > Can anyone shed any light on this? The person who was maintaining the OS-X branch moved on to other things and hasn't been maintaing it any more. Craig at gumstix only maintains the main linux branch. -- Dave Hylands Vancouver, BC, Canada http://www.DaveHylands.com/ |
From: Chris C. <che...@ho...> - 2007-09-20 14:10:28
|
Is there any way I can get the linux one to compile on osx or do I need to try and dual boot with yellow dog or something along those lines? On 19/9/07 16:14, "Dave Hylands" <dhy...@gm...> wrote: > Hi Chris, > >> I use os x and have been downloading and compiling the os x buildroot for >> some time. I have recently had some problems so I decided to download the >> Linux version of the buildroot. When I compared the two I found that the os >> x trunk is drastically out of date. The linux buildroot has new versions of >> almost every package I downloaded including important ones like linux and >> u-boot. >> >> Can anyone shed any light on this? > > The person who was maintaining the OS-X branch moved on to other > things and hasn't been maintaing it any more. > > Craig at gumstix only maintains the main linux branch. |
From: Ethan Tira-T. <ej...@an...> - 2007-09-19 16:23:22
|
> I would really like these new versions however when I try to > compile the > linux buildroot it gives me too many errors. I too am hanging around in the background on this list hoping to hear an announcement when the OS X branch is updated. Personally, I wonder about the wisdom of maintaining a "branch". Most packages I've built work just fine with little or no modification, and don't require separate linux and os x build routines. Instead of trying to actively maintain a branch, wouldn't it be better to just patch the trunk to detect the platform and tweak the flags and such which are used? (e.g. cp -p (for "preserve") instead of cp -a is an obvious one I ran into off the bat... I think these are mostly BSD vs. Linux issues, so you'll pick up more than just OS X) -ethan |
From: Dave H. <dhy...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 16:28:20
|
Hi Ethan, > Personally, I wonder about the wisdom of maintaining a "branch". > Most packages I've built work just fine with little or no > modification, and don't require separate linux and os x build > routines. Instead of trying to actively maintain a branch, wouldn't > it be better to just patch the trunk to detect the platform and tweak > the flags and such which are used? (e.g. cp -p (for "preserve") > instead of cp -a is an obvious one I ran into off the bat... I think > these are mostly BSD vs. Linux issues, so you'll pick up more than > just OS X) I think that the intention by the original maintainer was to eventually merge back, but the main branch went through some major revisions which made a merge unfeasible (at least that's my recollection). I'm sure Craig would accept patches where appropriate. The real effort is getting the patches merged upstream into the main buildroot, which requires somebody to manage it. -- Dave Hylands Vancouver, BC, Canada http://www.DaveHylands.com/ |
From: Michael C. <mi...@ca...> - 2007-09-19 17:50:29
|
when might this be fixed. I actually just bought a Mac (first time ever for me) Just for working with my gumstix project. this is a little unsettling to hear that the BuildRoot is out of date. What needs to be done to merge it back or bring it up to date. -Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Hylands" <dhy...@gm...> To: "General mailing list for gumstix users." <gum...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 12:28 PM Subject: Re: [Gumstix-users] Out of date os x buildroot > Hi Ethan, > >> Personally, I wonder about the wisdom of maintaining a "branch". >> Most packages I've built work just fine with little or no >> modification, and don't require separate linux and os x build >> routines. Instead of trying to actively maintain a branch, wouldn't >> it be better to just patch the trunk to detect the platform and tweak >> the flags and such which are used? (e.g. cp -p (for "preserve") >> instead of cp -a is an obvious one I ran into off the bat... I think >> these are mostly BSD vs. Linux issues, so you'll pick up more than >> just OS X) > > I think that the intention by the original maintainer was to > eventually merge back, but the main branch went through some major > revisions which made a merge unfeasible (at least that's my > recollection). > > I'm sure Craig would accept patches where appropriate. > > The real effort is getting the patches merged upstream into the main > buildroot, which requires somebody to manage it. > > -- > Dave Hylands > Vancouver, BC, Canada > http://www.DaveHylands.com/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Ethan Tira-T. <ej...@an...> - 2007-09-19 18:38:47
|
> this is a little unsettling to hear that the BuildRoot is out of date. I might add, not just "out of date", but completely lacking support for the verdex line... :( It would help me btw, if someone defined 'buildroot' and it relationship to gumstix... My understanding is that buildroot is basically a set of scripts for acquiring/configuring/compiling the packages needed for a gcc cross- compiler. But further, it's also something of a package manager for everything in the environment that winds up going in the embedded system? (e.g. linux kernel, command line utilities, etc.) And gumstix is maintaining its own fork of the buildroot project in order to customize the package selection and configuration for their line of products? Part of the trick in my case is that I already have the verdex system set up, and I'd be happy with having *just* the cross compiler on my local (OS X) development system. For doing the occasional system update, it would be fine to fall back to a linux system. But not being able to build my own code on my local system is a nuisance, and that's where I'm spending 99% of my time. -ethan |
From: Dave H. <dhy...@gm...> - 2007-09-19 18:49:17
|
Hi Ethan, > It would help me btw, if someone defined 'buildroot' and it > relationship to gumstix... Buildroot is an open source project which can be found over here: <http://buildroot.uclibc.org/> It is designed as a series of scripts and makefiles for building a toolchain, kernel, and other assorted packages for embedded linux systems. Building for embedded systems has unique challenges since you need to use a cross compiler. > My understanding is that buildroot is basically a set of scripts for > acquiring/configuring/compiling the packages needed for a gcc cross- > compiler. But further, it's also something of a package manager for > everything in the environment that winds up going in the embedded > system? (e.g. linux kernel, command line utilities, etc.) Yeah - that's the basic picture. > And gumstix is maintaining its own fork of the buildroot project in > order to customize the package selection and configuration for their > line of products? Well, it's more to maintain a set of patches required to build stuff on the gumstix. So buildroot contains many packages that won't work on the gumstix, or may require tweaks. u-boot and the kernel are the two packages which require the most modification. Most of the other stuff works with only minor changes. > Part of the trick in my case is that I already have the verdex system > set up, and I'd be happy with having *just* the cross compiler on my > local (OS X) development system. For doing the occasional system > update, it would be fine to fall back to a linux system. But not > being able to build my own code on my local system is a nuisance, and > that's where I'm spending 99% of my time. The toolchain is the first thing that's built, so if you can get that portion to work, then you can stop and not have to build the rest of buildroot. You can then use the toolchain for building your own stuff and not have to use buildroot at all. The hello-world sample is an example of doing just that. -- Dave Hylands Vancouver, BC, Canada http://www.DaveHylands.com/ |