Re: RTC anti-rollback testing
I've tried in 2 XO 1.0 and I have the same behaviour in both laptops. For each boot, the laptop repeats steps b and c, then, laptop powers off. If XO have rt tag will never boot. 2011/10/14 Mitch Bradley w...@laptop.org The most likely explanation is that OFW had to power off in order to re-enable writing to the SPI FLASH. That can happen if the last reboot was from Linux. See http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/4397 Unless that bug is fixed, the process will be: a) Linux reboots b) OFW runs rtc-rollback? and tries to write the new timestamp SPI FLASH c) OFW is unable to perform the write because SPI FLASH is locked d) OFW reboots, using the EC command that unlocks SPI FLASH e) OFW runs rtc-rollback? and sucessfully writes the new timestamp' The net result is that reboots will take slightly longer when anti-rollback is enabled. On 10/14/2011 2:53 AM, Esteban Bordón wrote: 2011/10/11 Esteban Bordón ebor...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy Hi all, I'm trying to test the RTCAR including on OFW Q2E46 by following the steps indicated in http://wiki.laptop.org/go/RTC_Anti-rollback#Testing_Rollback_Detection. I added the rt tag, but when I run command ok rtc-rollback? .the laptop powers off. Is it a normal behaviour? cheers,Esteban ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: serial numbers on new motherboards
Hi Sridhar! I didn't know you were getting bare motherboards. Reuben should have some scripts and recommendations as to how to handle the situation. You'll want to have the right mfg data -- serial number, UUID, KL, KA, KV, LO -- for things to work correctly. Otherwise quite a few things will be not-quite-right in fun and surprising ways. cheers, m On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: I'm wondering what is the recommended process for changing an XO motherboard. The hardware side is relatively straightforward. However, new motherboards come with blank serial numbers. What is the impact of leaving the SN# in the mfg-data blank? My understanding is that parts of the XO OS first-boot setup and interactions with an XS are derived from the serial number. We have devised a method (using an olpc.fth script) to write the serial number of the XO chassis to the mfg-data on the board. What is the method used in other deployments? Thanks, Sridhar Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia M: +61 425 239 701 E: srid...@laptop.org.au A: G.P.O. Box 731 Sydney, NSW 2001 W: www.laptop.org.au ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
After 11.3.0, 11.3.1 - notes
The 11.3.0 cycle is coming to a close. Hopefully without distracting too much from it, I wanted to circulate some brief notes on what follows. The steering goals for 11.3.0 have been to have a good quality release for deployments using XO-1 and XO-1.5, and a known-stable stack to serve as scaffolding to the XO-1.75 efforts. We haven't finished 11.3.0 yet but I think there is ample evidence that it is working. On the XO-1.75 front, we are clearly a little further from finished -- our release candidates for XO-1.75 aren't really. But that's natural with software changes riding on top of hardware changes. So our plan is to release 11.3.0 as planned; and open a second deep-freeze bugfix window that will lead to 11.3.1 . During this period we will accept - XO-1.75 platform improvements -- namely drivers and kernel fixes. - High importance regression bugs elsewhere in the stack, only after careful triaging. After the 11.3.0 cycle, we don't expect any here. The timeframe for this bugfix window is still unclear. The dashing Daniel will be released from his release management duties once he releases 11.3.0. For the 11.3.1, I will drive the release process, and will be begging for help from experienced RMs (hi Simon!) and Peter for the build process. Not only we are losing a widely feared RM, but also a fantastic debugger and across-the-stack hacker. Hoping Daniel continues to work with us going forward. After 11.3.x, we have a major leap ahead. The next development cycle breaks all of our toys, with systemd, gtk/PyGO, GNOME3, NetworkManager, Linux 3.x on x86 and F-16-ARMv7HL. Too bad Debian has the Lenny name taken. cheers, m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: RTC anti-rollback testing
I traced the problem to a missing feature in the Embedded Controller firmware for XO-1 .http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/11347 . Richard and I will work on it soon, during down time in our impending trip to Shanghai. On 10/17/2011 2:11 AM, Esteban Bordón wrote: I've tried in 2 XO 1.0 and I have the same behaviour in both laptops. For each boot, the laptop repeats steps b and c, then, laptop powers off. If XO have rt tag will never boot. 2011/10/14 Mitch Bradley w...@laptop.org mailto:w...@laptop.org The most likely explanation is that OFW had to power off in order to re-enable writing to the SPI FLASH. That can happen if the last reboot was from Linux. See http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/4397 Unless that bug is fixed, the process will be: a) Linux reboots b) OFW runs rtc-rollback? and tries to write the new timestamp SPI FLASH c) OFW is unable to perform the write because SPI FLASH is locked d) OFW reboots, using the EC command that unlocks SPI FLASH e) OFW runs rtc-rollback? and sucessfully writes the new timestamp' The net result is that reboots will take slightly longer when anti-rollback is enabled. On 10/14/2011 2:53 AM, Esteban Bordón wrote: 2011/10/11 Esteban Bordón ebor...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy mailto:ebor...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy Hi all, I'm trying to test the RTCAR including on OFW Q2E46 by following the steps indicated in http://wiki.laptop.org/go/RTC_Anti-rollback#Testing_Rollback_Detection. I added the rt tag, but when I run command ok rtc-rollback? . the laptop powers off. Is it a normal behaviour? cheers, Esteban ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: After 11.3.0, 11.3.1 - notes
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote: The 11.3.0 cycle is coming to a close. Hopefully without distracting too much from it, I wanted to circulate some brief notes on what follows. The steering goals for 11.3.0 have been to have a good quality release for deployments using XO-1 and XO-1.5, and a known-stable stack to serve as scaffolding to the XO-1.75 efforts. We haven't finished 11.3.0 yet but I think there is ample evidence that it is working. On the XO-1.75 front, we are clearly a little further from finished -- our release candidates for XO-1.75 aren't really. But that's natural with software changes riding on top of hardware changes. So our plan is to release 11.3.0 as planned; and open a second deep-freeze bugfix window that will lead to 11.3.1 . During this period we will accept - XO-1.75 platform improvements -- namely drivers and kernel fixes. - High importance regression bugs elsewhere in the stack, only after careful triaging. After the 11.3.0 cycle, we don't expect any here. The timeframe for this bugfix window is still unclear. Query: Some of the 11.2.0 targeted languages (presumably the same in 11.3.0) are still a good way from completion. I would like to know if I should press for L10n of those specifically, as there is a reasonable chance we could pick up some coverage if the L10n whip is wielded judiciously. L10n commits will need to be checked for build-breakers (printf and terminal newlines are the common culprits), but otherwise is not generally going to introduce unexpected issues. cjl [1] http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2011-February/031016.html en_US es ar pt pt_BR fr ht mn mr_IN am_ET km_KH ne_NP ur_PK rw ps fa_AF si de zh_CN ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: After 11.3.0, 11.3.1 - notes
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote: Some of the 11.2.0 targeted languages (presumably the same in 11.3.0) are still a good way from completion. Which ones are some way from completion? Where do you expect progress to be made? newlines are the common culprits), but otherwise is not generally going to introduce unexpected issues. In the 10.1.x series we had some fun with dialogs not resizing correctly, so the risk *is* there :-/ If languages progress over over time, even if they don't fit our cycle, deployments can pull them in for a custom build. This is right now fairly awkward, but perhaps we can automate it a bit with some improvements to OOB. cheers, m -- mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: After 11.3.0, 11.3.1 - notes
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Martin Langhoff mar...@laptop.org wrote: On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote: Some of the 11.2.0 targeted languages (presumably the same in 11.3.0) are still a good way from completion. Which ones are some way from completion? Where do you expect progress to be made? See attached spreadsheet for details. As with many things, progress seems to get made where attention is focused and where resources can be begged, borrowed or stolen. I can't do the translations myself, and attempts at rallying the troops has differing impacts and differing rates of return on effort depending on the language. These are all selected as OLPC deployment langs, so I guess one question is what can OLPC do to encourage L10n efforts in these langs by the local deployment partners. newlines are the common culprits), but otherwise is not generally going to introduce unexpected issues. In the 10.1.x series we had some fun with dialogs not resizing correctly, so the risk *is* there :-/ So the time for testing these issues would be now, across as many langs as possible (not just the 11.3.0 selection). Advanced testing by the local deployment partners of these langs would be most critical for this subset. If languages progress over over time, even if they don't fit our cycle, deployments can pull them in for a custom build. This is right now fairly awkward, but perhaps we can automate it a bit with some improvements to OOB. Yes, we are also working to re-establish the language pack generation script that used to work back in the 0.82 days, this would provide another means of picking up newer L10n bits. I'm not suggesting the inclusion of any given L10n bits in the 11.3.0 build as a blocker, just trying to determine if it is worth trying to make a focused effort on that language subset (to the exclusion of the other ~110 or so) to drive L10n to the extent possible before the 11.3.1 release or not. It is an allocation of effort question on my part. cjl 11.3.0_L10n_status.ods Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.spreadsheet ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Host AP on XO-1.75 and XO-3
On 13 October 2011 02:03, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Just wondering whether the XO-1.75 and XO-3 will be capable of hosting a wireless network. I'm asking because we are interested in using an XO as a lightweight XS server. There is a very early implementation of hostap code (based on a thinfirm) for the Libertas chip. Your current options are - add a usb-ethernet + AP - add a usb-wlan that is known to run well in hostap mode getting hostap to work (and to work well and reliably!) is a long road. If I understand correctly, the XS-on-XO sets the internal WLAN to ad-hoc mode and runs dhcpd on the interface to simulate an infrastructure network. Given the capabilities of the WLAN card present in both the XO-1.5 and XO-1.75, could such a setup reliably manage collaboration for a class of 30 children? This configuration would eliminate the need for us to connect external wireless hardware. Thanks, Sridhar ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Server-devel] Host AP on XO-1.75 and XO-3
On 13 October 2011 02:03, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au wrote: Just wondering whether the XO-1.75 and XO-3 will be capable of hosting a wireless network. I'm asking because we are interested in using an XO as a lightweight XS server. There is a very early implementation of hostap code (based on a thinfirm) for the Libertas chip. Your current options are - add a usb-ethernet + AP - add a usb-wlan that is known to run well in hostap mode getting hostap to work (and to work well and reliably!) is a long road. If I understand correctly, the XS-on-XO sets the internal WLAN to ad-hoc mode and runs dhcpd on the interface to simulate an infrastructure network. Given the capabilities of the WLAN card present in both the XO-1.5 and XO-1.75, could such a setup reliably manage collaboration for a class of 30 children? This configuration would eliminate the need for us to connect external wireless hardware. Thanks, Sridhar ___ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
