Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On Oct 5, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2016-10-01, Rick Thomas wrote: >> On Jun 5, 2016, at 1:35 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >>> On 2016-06-05, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: I have the same problem with my Cubox-i 4x4. Is there any

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

> On Oct 5, 2016, at 11:57 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > Hello, > > On 10/05/2016 10:54 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >> I believe it actually requires u-boot to initialize ram timings and >> various other parameters. You can trick the kernel into using more > >

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

Hello, On 10/05/2016 10:54 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > I believe it actually requires u-boot to initialize ram timings and > various other parameters. You can trick the kernel into using more Right, the kernel expects the boot loader to initialize RAM. I don't know about u-boot, but barebox

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

> On Oct 5, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > It would of course be useful to experiment with alternative methods, but > my guess is getting proper patches into u-boot may likely be the > simplest approach. It just takes some work. Anything I can do as a tester

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On 2016-10-01, Rick Thomas wrote: > On Jun 5, 2016, at 1:35 PM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >> On 2016-06-05, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: >>> I have the same problem with my Cubox-i 4x4. Is there any progress on >>> this? ... >>> Are the patches incorporated into the latest version

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

Vagrant Cascadian writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > On 2016-04-24, Rick Thomas wrote: >> Any chance I could download a pre-built binary? > > Just uploaded u-boot 2016.05-rc2 packages to: > > deb http://cascadia.debian.net/~vagrant/debian UNRELEASED main > > The

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On 04/26/16 00:51, Rick Thomas wrote: On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:54 PM, Rick Thomas wrote: I seem to remember that I got roughly the same number (lightly less than 2.0 GiB) when I booted the manufacturer supplied u-boot and Ubuntu kernel from the uSD-card that came with it.

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:54 PM, Rick Thomas wrote: >>> >>> I seem to remember that I got roughly the same number (lightly less >>> than 2.0 GiB) when I booted the manufacturer supplied u-boot and >>> Ubuntu kernel from the uSD-card that came with it. >> >> Maybe it came with

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On 2016-04-24, Rick Thomas wrote: > Any chance I could download a pre-built binary? Just uploaded u-boot 2016.05-rc2 packages to: deb http://cascadia.debian.net/~vagrant/debian UNRELEASED main The u-boot-imx package there worked on my cubox-i4x4, but will almost certainly hang on a

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

Hello, On 04/22/2016 08:54 AM, Rick Thomas wrote: > > On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:04 AM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > >> On 2016-04-21, Rick Thomas wrote: >>> Are you saying that the amount of RAM seen by Debian Linux is >>> determined by something in u-boot? >> >> Yes. > > How is

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

Any chance I could download a pre-built binary? (It’s been a couple of decades since I actually built any binaries… |-: ) Please forgive my curiosity. I’m trying to understand how this process works… Do I understand correctly that this is part of the definition of a structure that contains

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:04 AM, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2016-04-21, Rick Thomas wrote: >> Are you saying that the amount of RAM seen by Debian Linux is >> determined by something in u-boot? > > Yes. How is this information communicated from u-boot to the Linux kernel?

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:04:38AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > That's how it's worked for me, yes. > > There's something about the imx6 that limits it to 3.8GB. It is Cortex-A9 which is 32bit, and hence it needs a bit of memory range set aside for I/O, like networking and disk and PCIe and

Re: Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

On 2016-04-21, Rick Thomas wrote: > Are you saying that the amount of RAM seen by Debian Linux is > determined by something in u-boot? Yes. > But if I were using your patched mainline u-boot, I would get a > different (larger) number (almost, but not quite, the full 4.0GiB)? That's how it's

Cubox-i 4x4 RAM [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

my curiosity (: > > On 2016-04-20, Rick Thomas wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, at 06:36 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >>> I was wondering what is the performance of various armhf boards, for >>> package building. >> ... >>> cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net

Cubox-i4x4 - [was Re: Performance of armhf boards]

>>> I was wondering what is the performance of various armhf boards, for >>> package building. >> ... >>> cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net19962365# 4x,4G; >>> Cubox-i4x4 >>> cbxi4pro0-armhf-rb.debian.net 19732743

Re: Performance of armhf boards

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 05:17:02PM -0700, Rick Thomas wrote: > One personal experience that may be relevant: > > I ordered a Cubox-i4x4 from NewEgg a few months ago. When it arrived it > was clearly marked as a 4x4, and in the original shrink-wrap, But it > only had 2GB of RAM. I notified

Re: Performance of armhf boards

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, at 06:36 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > Hi! > > I was wondering what is the performance of various armhf boards, for > package building. ... > cbxi4a-armhf-rb.debian.net19962365# 4x,4G; > Cubox-i4x4 > cbxi4pro

Performance of armhf boards

Hi! I was wondering what is the performance of various armhf boards, for package building. Of course, the reproducible-builds team have a lot of stats already. Below I'm sharing the query I used and the results in case anyone else is interested in this. Using https://tests.reproducible