Dave Pigott <[email protected]> writes: > On 15 Nov 2012, at 13:08, 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? > > > +1 - ideal solution
+1 from me too. Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
