On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Antonio Terceiro <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:20:11PM +1300, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: >> Dave Pigott <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > On 12 Nov 2012, at 12:49, Alexander Sack <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Dave Pigott <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Just the one since Saturday: >> >>> >> >>> ---------------- >> >>> snowball06 >> >>> ---------------- >> >>> http://validation.linaro.org/lava-server/scheduler/job/38435 >> >>> >> >>> As noted by Andy, this is our most flakey snowball. I'm proposing >> >>> retiring it. It failed three times to reboot and get the network up. I >> >>> went on the board and had to hard reset to get the network to come up, >> >>> which suggests it gets into a weird state that needs a completely clean >> >>> boot. >> >> >> >> What is a clean boot? And why are we not doing a clean boot by default? >> > >> > Clean boot = hard reset >> > >> > Yes, I thought the same. I think we should always do a hard reset >> > rather than a soft boot. It would mean the board state would be more >> > likely to be consistent. >> >> The worry with always power cycling on master image targets is that >> powering off sd cards is not particularly friendly, the firmware might >> be shuffling blocks around as you do it and so even parts of the master >> rootfs might be lost. But maybe we should try it and see what happens. >> >> With the sd mux, we have to power cycle each time anyway. > > What about first sending a "halt" command to make sure everything is > flushed properly, and only after that power cycling the board?
Yeah. That's what I would expect... -- Alexander Sack Technical Director, Linaro Platform Teams http://www.linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog _______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
