From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 2 22:29:00 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2412528C for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 22:29:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.FoxValley.net (mail.FoxValley.net [64.135.192.34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA529D41 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 22:28:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 10927 invoked from network) for freebsd-arm@freebsd.org; 2 Dec 2014 16:28:52 -0600 Received: from marengo.foxvalley.net (draymond@64.135.192.25) by mail.foxvalley.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2014 16:28:52 -0600 Received: from sp5.qualcomm.com (sp5.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.55]) by webmail.FoxValley.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Tue, 02 Dec 2014 16:28:52 -0600 Message-ID: <20141202162852.w97gp1gmpkw004kw@webmail.FoxValley.net> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 16:28:52 -0600 From: draymond@FoxValley.net To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: re: new support for Raspberry Pi B+ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.2) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 22:29:00 -0000 > It seems that "portsnap fetch update" is a consistent way to > generate a panic. I have now seen panics with all four of my SD > cards on two different Raspberry Pis, and with three different > power cables. All occurred while running at low speed for SD > (25MHz) on r274416. > > ... > > Ian, you mentioned that you thought this looked like a memory > corruption similar to the issues reported on Wandboard. I have been > reading those threads but I don't fully understand what is the > issue. Can you clarify? I also saw some discussion about some new > changes currently under testing and planned for release. Are these > expected to resolve the memory corruption? What is the root cause > and is the problem present in all builds or just recent builds? Ian, can you comment?