Hi, On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 22:31:33 +0100 joerg Reisenweber <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu 16 March 2017 13:19:25 H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > > > > Am 16.03.2017 um 12:20 schrieb Andreas Kemnade <[email protected]>: > > > > > > Hallo Nikolaus, > > > > > > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 21:24:18 +0100 > > > > > > H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Hi all, > > >> you may be wondering how progress is. > > >> > > >> First of all, I have currently 11 GTA04A5 working boards on my > > >> desk (one did work initially but failed since now) which boot > > >> fine. > > >> > > >> It turned out that our hw-test script was not testing all > > >> components as good as possible, so I have worked on it to > > >> be much better. Now it also tests WLAN, Bluetooth, GPS > > >> and some other components. In total it was much more effort > > >> to put into kernel and hw-test to really be able to do > > >> such an automated test. Reason is that you also have to test > > >> the tester... And make the kernel and user-space work stable > > >> for almost all chips and interfaces. > > > > > > What I am wondering about is the backup battery test. I do not think it > > > is a good idea to test only once. My old semi-broken gta04 gives flaky > > > values there. So sometimes the voltage might look ok, sometimes wrong. > > > So the test might miss problems. > > > > Yes. It is very difficult to write tests that have 100% coverage of > > all potential failures. Especially for rare failures. > > > > Most of the tests are a little primitive and hence incomplete. They > > mainly test if the PCB has been soldered properly, i.e. if peripheral > > components can be accessed and respond reasonable to all stimuli. > > > > Sometimes they don't even check this. For example the tvout test does > > not test hardware (unless a tv set is connected to the headset jack > > and somebody has a look at the result). So it is not even an automatic > > test. > > > > The backup test only checks if the supercap is being charged and has > > reached a reasonable voltage since power-on. If the supercap would be > > missing or had a bad solder joint it would no charge at all. > > > > It does not even attempt to test the capacity of the supercap and if > > and how long it maintains RTC during battery switching. > > That's probably a problem here: even an unsoldered polyacene cap would leave > the charger circuit with a - however minimal - capacity vs GND, so it would > charge up very quickly and for sure reach nominal voltage. For a way more > thorough test, the charger circuit in TWL4030 should get switched off prior > to > voltage test (if possible, I don't have the TRM at hand, with the register > specs) or alternatively RTC get checked if it has a "power failed" flag set, > or > keeps time, after brief removal of main power supply > I don't think so. The charger will oscillate. Here is a measurement result of probably such a situation: root@gta04:~# for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ; do cat /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio\:device1/in_voltage9_input ; sleep 1 ; done 3030 2863 3431 3466 3382 2727 3316 3171 Regards, Andreas
pgpvGeJROZWbm.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goldelico.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/community http://www.tinkerphones.org
