From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45704C433F5 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 19:03:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wr1-f43.google.com (mail-wr1-f43.google.com [209.85.221.43]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.1030.1636398190530021118 for ; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 11:03:10 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=P8DRkunh; spf=pass (domain: gmail.com, ip: 209.85.221.43, mailfrom: b.hutchman@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wr1-f43.google.com with SMTP id d24so28703786wra.0 for ; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 11:03:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a9OfkPbsNTyx+C/xJ2gL9ERHbwoTLe1ehbU5S1uiNk0=; b=P8DRkunhZ8KLGNYJWDtt8AuJiDxtpPzvgJWD7MDKecqtv5e8O4gZ4H3LD0MWVvxnsp xfPqBjXdl01X/W+nDaABn5Gq1pE3wEzNOGm5mhZeLYmft1HcZDgjLOAkVQ7fK0i0gbpF BJg3xlb0n0a8yOPvWJaJmk+ELltXosjEsUayXYmbzJoia3u7YfTiSJUApgsCvypDV0Yq d0JHG7LwZyR7JUlUjZywaoG9oE94cEXUcULsCYKZpkhQ1kOVn1v8+8pgVtI+ZVcGXOcH EPz2YvLVMZ73I2rjS50fPJIzsvQjG1q1cAV5JPb/+8Fg0KkpztoxCj7JAQ7qG07knFl/ rFUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a9OfkPbsNTyx+C/xJ2gL9ERHbwoTLe1ehbU5S1uiNk0=; b=asUWX0HyNPh/wPQ/YIuRFTel1XL2DeuXbTOmBU8Q39KRBfE3cem8EZAqZJ1oI0LOzV iJnhqrTcq6eJ+tnNR+2y7kak0l45bUgNqEeubKzdCy9k4r0bRUASNcFz8zQUZ0n72I2/ t46g/lB+I0AD6J7HyaO5r8xFPIwr4B/SW+Ng8g0Wwq4WyWqVHgBVxzSigJY3Axsn59ra AZv9A6YlaJB7yIFCcymlA2bj9hTgjBNihXbj1l3KL6qAs6HFLa8ZttMjH33EmfPRsea6 lrfyhTkhaZRLYCmA04QX4sDhxojkma6EKQAuPtUNEJA9mfySRfEhFIcTOeef8XCmoWOC ccyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531e/hz18ShCZBbdR8BGIhm87fw0IQhnWmRSjV7Jlm3j+SryIlPR q/AQmyk87E4BIyzz5w/aMylMvQlzhjfOWLBUYN0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJztCSmrUZS+FBG8WWdEs5dV64I/R+DTXqF7BcgEg/39eNOWbzUTEYB47RBbiKYlcMHxg/3qJhorcvdfEk0YPQo= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6da9:: with SMTP id u9mr1739900wrs.237.1636398188581; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 11:03:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <16B59367D6CBF8AF.22718@lists.yoctoproject.org> In-Reply-To: <16B59367D6CBF8AF.22718@lists.yoctoproject.org> From: Brian Hutchinson Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 14:02:56 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] fw_printenv works but fw_setenv does not after switching to linux-fslc-imx 5.10.69 from linux-fslc-imx 5.4.114 To: "b.hutchman" Cc: Fabio Estevam , meta-freescale@lists.yoctoproject.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bdd74505d04ba4dd" List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 19:03:11 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-freescale/message/24784 --000000000000bdd74505d04ba4dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 7:55 AM Brian Hutchinson via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > Hi Fabio, > > On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 5:49 AM Fabio Estevam wrote: > >> Hi Brian, >> >> On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:01 AM Brian Hutchinson >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm using u-boot U-Boot 2019.04-4.19.35-1.1.0+g4d377539a1 in >> pre-programmed NOR flash and was using linux-fslc-imx 5.4.114 kernel and >> fw_printenv/fw_setenv were working fine. >> > >> > After upgrading to linux-fslc-imx 5.10.69, fw_setenv will not change >> any u-boot variable. fw_printenv looks like it is working ok. I've >> verified all my .config settings are the same with regard to MTD etc as my >> older 5.4.114 kernel. >> > >> > Any ideas what could be broken? >> >> Could it be that on 5.10 the MTD devices are registered in a different >> order, which causes a different mtd numbering of the devices? >> > > Nope, cat /proc/mtd looks good. Same order as in previous kernels. > > >> Does fw_setenv give any error? >> > > It does not. It shows no signs of a problem, returns no errors or > warnings at all. It "looks" like it worked normal but does not change the > u-boot environment variable. > > Regards, > > Brian > > > Update. I booted my board via NFS using core-image-base from the hardknot build I got 5.10.69 from and libubootenv. I copied in fw_printenv/fs_setenv from tmp/work/imx8mm_ddr4_evk-poky-linux/libubootenv/0.3.1-r0/image/usr/bin ... and got the same result. This eliminates any possibility that it was a libc issue with me copying fw_printenv/fw_setenv to my Dunfell rootfs. So something else must be going on here. fw_setenv not liking the format of older u-boot env??? It will be a royal pain if I have to update our u-boot just to get fw_setenv to work again. I may take this hardknott wic image and flash it to sdcard and boot from sdcard so both u-boot and 5.10.69 are of same release to see if that works ... if it does then it points to being a u-boot issue with my older u-boot ;( Regards, Brian --000000000000bdd74505d04ba4dd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 7:55 AM Brian = Hutchinson via lists.yoctoproject= .org <b.hutchman=3Dgmail.com@lists.yoctoproject.org> wrote:
Hi Fabio,

On Mo= n, Nov 8, 2021 at 5:49 AM Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Brian,

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:01 AM Brian Hutchinson <b.hutchman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm using u-boot U-Boot 2019.04-4.19.35-1.1.0+g4d377539a1 in pre-p= rogrammed NOR flash and was using linux-fslc-imx 5.4.114 kernel and fw_prin= tenv/fw_setenv were working fine.
>
> After upgrading to linux-fslc-imx 5.10.69, fw_setenv will not change a= ny u-boot variable.=C2=A0 fw_printenv looks like it is working ok.=C2=A0 I&= #39;ve verified all my .config settings are the same with regard to MTD etc= as my older 5.4.114 kernel.
>
> Any ideas what could be broken?

Could it be that on 5.10 the MTD devices are registered in a different
order, which causes a different mtd numbering of the devices?

Nope, cat /proc/mtd looks good.=C2=A0 Same order as = in previous kernels.


Does fw_setenv give any error?

It does = not.=C2=A0 It shows no signs of a problem, returns no errors or warnings at= all.=C2=A0 It "looks" like it worked normal but does not change = the u-boot environment variable.

Regards,

Brian



Update.=C2=A0 I booted my board vi= a NFS using core-image-base from the hardknot build I got 5.10.69 from and = libubootenv.=C2=A0 I copied in fw_printenv/fs_setenv from=C2=A0 tmp/work/im= x8mm_ddr4_evk-poky-linux/libubootenv/0.3.1-r0/image/usr/bin ... and got the= same result.=C2=A0 This eliminates any possibility that it was a libc issu= e with me copying fw_printenv/fw_setenv to my Dunfell rootfs.=C2=A0 So some= thing else must be going on here.=C2=A0 fw_setenv not liking the format of = older u-boot env???=C2=A0 It will be a royal pain if I have to update our u= -boot just to get fw_setenv to work again.

I may t= ake this hardknott wic image and flash it to sdcard and boot from sdcard so= both u-boot and 5.10.69 are of same release to see if that works ... if it= does then it points to being a u-boot issue with my older u-boot ;(
<= div>
Regards,

Brian
<= /div> --000000000000bdd74505d04ba4dd--