2020/freebsd-arm/20201018.freebsd-arm
Messages: 72, new messages first
|
Last update: Mon Feb 13 14:14:44 2023
|
|
home | archive sorted by: subject | author | date | reverse date
1. Oct 17 Dmitry Salychev BBB image build compilation errors 2. Oct 17 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: Status of SDIO 3. Oct 17 Bjoern A. Zeeb Re: Status of SDIO 4. Oct 17 ykla Status of SDIO 5. Oct 17 Mark Millard Experience report: u-boot update 2020.07 -> 2020.10 seems to go fairly well on the few u-boots that I've tested 6. Oct 16 Michal Meloun Re: panic: non-current pmap 0xffffa00020eab8f0 on Rpi3 7. Oct 16 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 8. Oct 16 Jeremy Faulkner weird espressobin behavior 9. Oct 15 KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko Re: RockPro64 booting w/ u-boot v2019-rc3 10. Oct 15 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 11. Oct 15 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 12. Oct 15 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 13. Oct 15 Robert Crowston Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 14. Oct 15 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 15. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 16. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 17. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 18. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 19. Oct 14 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 20. Oct 14 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited)
21. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 22. Oct 14 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 23. Oct 14 Mark Millard Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 24. Oct 14 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 25. Oct 14 Mark Millard 64-bit RPi4B u-boot hangup with modern rpi firmware: some information (but investigative-toolbox limited) 26. Oct 13 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: an example of what RAM u-boot reserves during operation [patches updated] 27. Oct 13 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 28. Oct 13 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: an example of what RAM u-boot reserves during operation [patch included] 29. Oct 12 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 30. Oct 12 Mark Millard RPi4B: an example of what RAM u-boot reserves during operation (not necessarily matching what it reports to the next stage) vs. armstub8-gic.b 31. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: Adding a "-1" into https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25219 's code looks to make uefi/ACPI handle USB3 SSD reliably 32. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 33. Oct 12 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 34. Oct 12 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: FreeBSD 13 not support boot form USB-MSD on rpi4. 35. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: u-boot printenv shows: fdt_addr=4000 (input to u-boot) vs. fdt_addr_r=0x02600000 (output from u-boot): 4000 is used by FreeBSD? 36. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: u-boot printenv shows: fdt_addr=4000 (input to u-boot) vs. fdt_addr_r=0x02600000 (output from u-boot): 4000 is used by FreeBSD? 37. Oct 12 Mark Millard RPi4B: u-boot printenv shows: fdt_addr=4000 (input to u-boot) vs. fdt_addr_r=0x02600000 (output from u-boot): 4000 is used by FreeBSD? 38. Oct 12 ykla FreeBSD 13 not support boot form USB-MSD on rpi4. 39. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 40. Oct 12 Mark Millard RPi4B: an example of what dtdebug=1 in config.txt shows
41. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 42. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: Patches from ~gonzo/arm/rpi3-smp/u-boot-patches/ missing from u-boot upstream and from relevant sysutils/u-boot-* ports? 43. Oct 12 Mark Millard Patches from ~gonzo/arm/rpi3-smp/u-boot-patches/ missing from u-boot upstream and from relevant sysutils/u-boot-* ports? 44. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 45. Oct 12 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 46. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 47. Oct 11 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 48. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 49. Oct 11 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 50. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 51. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 52. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 53. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 54. Oct 11 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 55. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 56. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 57. Oct 11 Kyle Evans Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 58. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 59. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 60. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]?
61. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 62. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 63. Oct 11 Mark Murray Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 64. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 65. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 66. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 67. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 68. Oct 11 Robert Crowston Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 69. Oct 11 Mark Millard Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 70. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: emmc2bus dma-range handling does not track the boot-time-FDT (u-boot based booting) 71. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]? 72. Oct 11 Klaus Cucinauomo Re: RPi4B: modern firmware vs. Device tree loaded to 0x4000 (size 0xbe0c) [fails] vs. to 0x1f0000 (size 0xbd90) [works]?
home | archive sorted by: subject | author | date | reverse date