chwe

if there would only be a SBC which has on board LIPO charging features with powerdetection and that boardvendor would sell cells which fit to the board... oh wait.. https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/A20/A20-OLinuXino-LIME2/open-source-hardware such boards exist..

and sometimes it's more or less the 'works for me' approach where it worked in the first place for 'developer x' and as long as nobody could show the opposite it was assumed to be 'good'. Mostly with one or maybe two boards of the SoC in question.. So our sample amount to optimize parameter might not be high enough to call this scientific. So our settings are based on observations but likely not on a scientific relevant sample amount. oh most of the few OC-er I know spend an unhealthy amount of time to ensure their OC setup works perfect stable at highest possible settings for their CPU/GPU/RAM, probably a way more time than we invest in our settings (my last AMD64 except my notebook where thermals don't allow to think about OC at all is now 7years old and has probably 2-3k hours stable at slightly overclocked settings, I don't see a difference between overclocking between architectures).. Now back to the topic and back to my observations.. I probably packed the linux kernel with 7z a few hundred times when I played around zram trying to find a difference in performance between lzo and lzo-rle (which is claimed to be faster on arm, and 7z is great to soak up a lot of memory). The board itself run for roughly 2 weeks with the image (5.3 kernel back then) and 7z run for hours over night packing and unpacking kernel sources. On my board I didn't notice instabilities except oom can kicks in (it mostly happened when trying to compile large libraries, but also happens sometimes with 7z and reducing available ram with kernel bootargs below 2GB iirc - could be less, I barley keep notes of such stuff when I don't see promising results. I sometimes should, turns out my brain runs oom too and I forget stuff over time). On my NanoPi M4V2 our default 2GHz/1.5GHz settings worked just fine.. Could be that I just got 'a better board than yours' which allows higher defaults (the same happens in AMD64 world - some CPUs from the same spec just perform better than others) or that something else on your settings isn't in a great shape and if this is the case I would bet on your powersupply. We see first indications that we run into the same nightmare with powering as we did with microUSB back then now on boards using USB-C in 'dump mode' being not PD compliant (USB-C is better than microUSB but the boards it's mostly used are also more powerhungry so being better doesn't mean being good). My setting was headless with a RPi4 PSU which is to my knowledge rated at 5.1V/3A. What PSU did you use for your board. @piter75 (maybe adding the other usual suspects too, so @TonyMac32 and @martinayotte) if this turns out to be a issue for m4v2 whereas the other boards do fine we could simply solve it by DT overlay and having it as default for those boards do well and disable it for the M4V2. Similar to https://github.com/armbian/build/blob/e78f6db215c9444ce83b8e80c85af88158ce4c2e/config/boards/orangepizero.conf#L6 to bring up USB2 on pinheader by default.

yours looks like bsp kernel.. well I only had mainline open.. No idea how this stuff is named in bsp.. and I won't dig into it.. check which node is defined for phy supply e.g. something like this: &u2phy1_host { phy-supply = <&vcc5v0_usb2>; }; and then make your changes in the referred regulator.. and as before.. I still don't recommend it..

to our luck this is not a forum only for moderators right? @Igor/ @lanefu if my style of moderating stuff is no longer valuable you can happily revoke my moderator rights then.. I'll spend my time on github and PM depending on motivation.. A forum needs to work for its users not only for the moderators. After all we as moderators do only a bit of housekeeping to keep the rest going. I favor the less active moderating style where you only take actions when things run out of control, either due to people insulting each other or it gets bloated by useless crap not related to the topic at all.. as long as things go more and less smooth I don't see a reason to either cut peoples rights or giving them 'official' warnings.. Others might have a different moderation style and that's also fine.. Different people will have different approaches how to solve things. Not everyone has to solve it the exact same way as I do but being able to edit posts is a feature people use and there are reasons to have it. and if 12 out of the 8204 users abuse it we're talking about less than 0.15% 'bad citizens'.. IMO a percentage we can and must accept. I'm confident that a higher percentage will use the same feature in a sane way.. Obviously if I see spammers I flag them, game over.. next one will come, next one will be banned as soon as it gets spotted.. Ofc this won't keep the forum a 100% clean from spam, but I can life without a 100% clean forum.

about which of the 'solutions' do we talk about.. verify e-mail address (then check if the spammer didn't do that as well - and if they didn't I guess they will learn that fast) restricting edit post with "random rules" if they're 'not harsh enough' they'll simply overcome it (e.g. register two accounts and then like each other once and going further with the same strategy as before).. if they're to harsh it will affect users - maybe not the old ones but the new ones.. going through my old approving list (only 14 hours here but already edited - in a 1day rule he could still do this.. i) some people will edit their thread.. e.g. hopefully when their first iteration doesn't give the attention they want they clarify things or just add a note that they solved the problem on their own.. I'd rather prefer that they edit it than adding a second post just which might then go as well in the category of topic bumping etc. Or just to summarize things on the first post so that for those new to the thread, it's easy to get a clue what happened. E.g. I have something like 40 edits in this thread (only counting mine).. To partly clarify things.. to add new findings.. to make clear things were solved.. etc. Others in board bring up do the same.. In my opinion.. if we really talk about 12 spammers which overcome the current spam-block system then this is a non issue at all. If this would be a daily issue where threads get messed up... ordinary users: write tutorials write boardbring ups (I was one back then when I dealt with mt7623n wrote the unofficial unsupported multimedia script i still love the name ( @JMCC, okay he's no longer an ordinary user I assume, but he started as one) Obviously it makes sense to use the feature responsible (e.g. make clear what you changed and maybe also why - a git diff to see the history of a post would be great.. btw @Igor a quick google search showed that this might be possible, but it mostly ends in dead links.. https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/364549-edit-history/ maybe your invision-fuu skills are better and you find something like that?). But it is used.. and there are a cases in which it makes absolutely sense. Also to avoid confusion (when you were obviously wrong with your assumption in the first term, or when something was solved (even when it's only editing the title from *random problem* to *random promlem [solved]* in fact you do this mostly over edit post... I don't think it's worth to disable this for users due to 12 people abusing it..

can you provide data how many spammers overcome our current system with first thread approved editing their follow up and how may posts they modify after its?

well you should be moderator long time ago.. but that's a different story.. (btw. how did that not happen?) for the rest of this post, take it with a grain of salt problem, most of those maintenance topics are boring as hell means that people may read the first post and then decide to no longer follow it, so once 'our' solution grows the majority of let's call them power users/ developers/ maintainers and even some moderators might not even realize which new rules are in charge now.. So the majority of the people contributing to the thread might be fine with the change.. Whereas it's not clear what the majority of power users etc. thinks about it... an automatized solution to fight spam will halve a automatized counter to produce spam.. And I'm confident that they will have more resources than we have... Cause I only saw a few of them (2-3).. About how many cases do we talk here? If we have only a few of such 'power spammers' I don't think it's worth to restrict user freedoms just to get those few spammers.. As soon as they edit recent topics of interest they get caught anyway and get flagged as spammers - game over for that account.. If we have a bunch of such spammers we could talk about restrictions but obviously they'll find a way to counter this so I don't see any automatized solution which will work in the long term.. back then when I maintained my own mailserver to register on various sites I had a small firefox plugin which generated a new mailadress random@mydomain.com and also 'validated' that mailadress successful for most cases without me taking any actions.. I'm quite sure their skill-level is higher than mine to achieve it.. I even made some statistics which sites then use those random mailadresses to send me spam after its.. As soon as a forum has some popularity you'll have spam, and you'll have to deal with. If the community is overall healthy they will hopefully help to report spammers or ignore those links (which mostly solves the issue itself, best case they report it then when they click by mistake on it - if the viagra for 2$ link isn't clicked - the spammer doesn't gain anything from it). If the community isn't healthy at all we better figure out what's wrong with our community than with the spammers..

I know.. I added that back then (I guess I knew my password back then.. )...

it's not the distributor - it's the company behind NanoPi boards.. IMO the whole thread can be moved to: https://forum.armbian.com/forum/31-sd-card-and-psu-issues/ NanoPi M4 being not PD-compliant and therefore might be troublesome is mentioned on the dowloadpage: linking to btw @Igor or @lanefu we might add the same disclaimer from nanopi m4 to the orangepi 4 cause this board will have the same issues (I updated the thread but forgot my credentials to the WP admin board to do it on my own - feel free to remove my rights there anyways I didn't do much maintenance of it and honestly don't plan to change that in the future). (hidden cause not really an advice more a hack to maybe achieve what you want but not what you should - having a sane powering for your setup) 3 amps at 5V is sufficient for the NanoPi M4 in most scenarios I had. But if you look at their "expansion hats", the USB3 and the SATA "hat" provide a barrel plug and for the sata hat additionally a ATX12V 4 Pin connector indicating that even they do not recommend using USB-C for such set-ups..

https://github.com/armbian/build/pull/1759/files#diff-309b3186e3060abd0485d767eefb324eR431 force-hpd just tells the display driver (panel simple) which pin is used for hotplug dedtection which is obviously not implemented in the pinebook (you can't remove the edp) and therefore likely also needed in 5.5. there you go: https://gitlab.manjaro.org/tsys/linux-pinebook-pro/blob/v5.5/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinebook-pro.dts#L445 at least display timings landed in mainline 3 days ago... The pinebook dts itslef didn't. add my repo as remote: https://github.com/chwe17/build/tree/rk3399_pinebook pull the pinebook branch and update boot.cmd (config->bootscripts->boot-rockchip64.cmd) with the one attached (cause I didn't push this upstream yet). And then build with ./compile.sh LIB_TAG=rk3399_pinebook boot-rockchip64.cmd

All RockPi images were developed and tested for RockPi4b v1.3 boards which didn't had SPI populated back then (also one of the LEDs couldn't be toggled back then, but that's a different story). Having multiple images for RockPis alone is something which won't happen as long as it isn't absolutely needed. People can hardly distinguish between the boards they have.. If we have to explain them now that they have to choose a image depending on which preloaded u-boot they have.... We'll have more trouble to answer all those questions than benefits. Also having "special images" for all RockPi compared to all other rk3399 boards is something which should not be needed (from a maintenance standpoint rk3399 is already "boated" enough, we do not need another 'special one' here). @Igor maybe we should just link to this thread on the DL page for the RockPi (or to a short tutorial how to wipe SPI) so that users have the chance to see it when they download their images? that's better asked to them on their support channels..

check the PR, they are all already in...

small update: it looks like this is mostly a kernel not kernel-config issue, using tobias kernel (v5.5) for majaro with our kernelconfig without any patches and the pinebook shows display output in mainline.. Either we patch something needed not into the kernel, or we patch something needed out... Note, I currently use a slightly adjusted boot.cmd but I tested this one before and with our current kernel it doesn't do the trick.

it was highly overpriced with 400-600$ (IMO still 100$ are too much for it) it is mostly undocumented what you got is a 4GB ddr3 rk3399 'TV box' with 2x2 wifi over mPCIe and 32GB eMMC with a 'connector' I've not seen any specification what's populated on it . which may or may not work with a 'generic DT' (generic means here any rk3399 dt file we have most of them are quite similar cause they follow more or less the reference design) for rk3399 boards. You can also (try to) 'extract' the dtb file from 'whatever is preloaded' on this box.. decompile it and follow all the phadles to see how nodes are connected to each other.. to adjust a working DT to match the box better or write one from plain.. (you can also use this blob directly on any sort 'armbian' and see if it is compatible). at least it has a debug UART populated (likely 3v3 but who knows, you should check that first) Is it worth it.. well that's up to you.. if you're interested in going down the rabbit hole and learn new things.. maybe it is (you can spend a lot of time with bootloaders, device tree etc. on it.. IIRC ddr3 should be supported with mainline u-boot, and what they have labeled 'service only' looks like a SD-card holder, so you can likely do your 'try and error attempts' to get something 'armbian a like' booting on this board without corrupting the OS which is currently preflashed on the eMMC. likely similar to that stuff here:http://wiki.t-firefly.com/en/Firefly-RK3399/adb_use.html So to summarize you currently got a paperweight and it's up to you to transform it in something useful. Even then I don't see much of a reason to provide support on such a board. It has a 'unknown' availability (you got it cheap from ebay, but as soon as this sellers run out of stock, it's likely never appearing again). For 100$ you get the nanopi m4v2 with a case which offers known schematics, support from the boardvendor, known connectors (including eMMC, PCIe, hdmi, camera and display interfaces) and the vendor known in SBC marked for years (they may not do everything perfect but you mostly know what you get, and in general those boards work as they should). This box might be nice if you plan to learn and dig into what can make it a pain to support random boxes with 'somehow' proper working images. But you may have to build your images on your own for a long time in case non of the images we provide for rk3399 will work out of the box (I would focus on images built for ddr3 ram type boards).

there's not much of a choice here.. SPI has priority over SD-Card/eMMC as long as there is a valid bootloader on it. From U-Boot 2017.09-02676-g4490220395 (Jul 01 2019 - 07:49:56 +0000) and DDR Version 1.20 20190314 doesn't look like armbian bootloader being used. I don't own a RockPi with SPI populated.. (additionally my SD-Card slot got damaged so that I can only use eMMC - don't let the SD-card inside when moving your board in your backpack in a box.. it will wipe off the card holder and there's so much plastic that you don't want to solder it after its.. ) I guess radxa has some debian packages to update SPI on their boards or send them with a preflashed version of their bootloader.

master

why should we? csi camera on rockchip is in general a pain.. quality 'has room for improvements': (that's ov5647 on the tinker - imx 219 is even worse see https://github.com/armbian/build/pull/1482).. and always after you do the initial lifting getting this things to work.. there's nobody catching it up, or let you know that they did and have improved stuff.. Then we end in having another board with 'camera support' but nobody uses it cause the output is crap. and nobody is willing to fix it. And as far as I know.. From all the armbian devs I'm currently the only one having a camera module for a rk3399 board (opi 4) and those two are not pincompatible to each other (and for the opi there's quite some other stuff on a todo list than camera).. didn't firefly even provide a image for dual camera on their board? so why should the same approach not work most other rk3399 boards? I don't think friendlyelec didn't mess much on the CSI ports to make things difficult here..

IMO the easiest way is ./compile.sh KERNEL_CONFIGURE=yes make your changes when menuconfig pops up and you get your new config in output/config after compilation. It's even named the way it should be..

and now power your board and your plates with an old atx PSU and repeat the tests to ensure it's not a powering issue. Sure not the setup you want but an easy way to nail down powering issues. Having 2 plates and a SSD uses a lot of juice. The CPU will not overheat as long as something doesn't go terrible wrong. Thermal throtteling should avoid it and performance should go down the drain but it needs "a lot of heat" until the board resets due to temperature issues. btw. maybe we should split this thread, one part is related pwm fans the other part is likely related to powering..

blobs: https://github.com/armbian/build/tree/master/packages/blobs/mt7623n https://github.com/armbian/build/blob/909be0239d8f3a9d6e2dae9da94d18b65e350320/config/sources/families/meson-gxl.conf#L18-L27 ends then in: https://github.com/armbian/odroidc2-blobs so we even already dealt with bootblobs we've no clue what they're doing.. especially meson-glx Well guess what, somebody ported a working UEFI firmware over still needs the blobs to chainload UEFI (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-platforms/tree/master/Platform/RaspberryPi/RPi3): the only serious attempt to avoid this was done by christinaa (https://github.com/christinaa/rpi-open-firmware) but more or less dead since months/years. So no there's no change that the RPi relies on bootblobs to get up and running Cause the bootloader (bootcode.bin) only understands FAT you also need some tweaks here and there in the buildscript.. But most of the needed features are there cause we support(ed?) having /boot on FAT. According to jamesh from the RPi forum their engineers don't see a reason that a bootloader should understand something like ext4 (I would have to search in my posts in their forum to get you a quote for that).. But safest bet for a more or less "sane" implementation would be bootcode chainloads u-boot and u-boot then properly loads a kernel sitting in a ext4 partition. IMO that doesn't fit to the 3b+ at all.. Maybe partly to the 4. In most when not all parts a rk3399 based on will outperform even the RP4 and for sure the RPi3 what do you mean with ROCK? means RockPi? then there you go:https://www.seeedstudio.com/PoE-HAT-for-ROCK-Pi-4-p-4143.html currently out of stock but allnet has it: https://shop.allnetchina.cn/products/rock-pi-4b-poe-hat I guess something like this will do the trick: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/33057941535.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.38d222ebEfaAc9&algo_pvid=ebc883c9-19fd-4f58-ae77-add76220ba26&algo_expid=ebc883c9-19fd-4f58-ae77-add76220ba26-3&btsid=1071dcd7-b020-4d15-ab51-f383395eff93&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_9,searchweb201603_53 obviously untested I don't deal with POE atm. Just make sure that you don't run into: RK3399 tends to be power-hungry.. but back to topic: have a sane implementation dealing with the bootstuff when possible don't add additional kernel sources (means build your kernel on top of mainline) Make sure that basic functionality even when you're not interested in works (e.g. USB/HDMI/UART or it's clearly that it doesn't work - well UART must work otherwise it's a pain to debug)

I had time to test my newly written DT for the orangepi4: sound still doesn't work (even when I replaced the bits to use rt5651) I guess some of the mic/headphone definitions in the DT are still wrong.. wifi works with network manager ethernet works as well both USB2 are tested and working (I've the NPU version so I didn't try to look at USB3 atm, may or may not work who knows) dmesg shows still some errors to wifi but I've no idea if this is related to the opi at all or just fall out from the normal driver situation here hdmi is untested yet (i've no spare device for doing it) actually the DT should also support eDP over USB-C as far as I've saw in the schematics the opi4 should do it as well.. this should be possible and it's done similar to the pinebook, obviously I've also no spare eDP over usb-c display... so for @piter75 if you want to mess with it.. here is an updated version of it.. And for the less experienced ones.. you might not wanna mess with it yet.. at least on the powertree there's nothing horrible wrong so that the board would not boot up.. opi4b_dts_v1.dts

more subforums add just more subforums I'll ignore.. and there are quite some atm. And it seems we have this discussion like once a year or so... And yes I started such a thread as well must be gone somewhere by one of our forum rearrangements... we have a: where all the not armbian related software questions can go as well.. and we have a and chit chat.. IMO chit chat is the place where everything goes in nobody wants to deal with.. The more subforums you have the higher the chance that people choose the wrong one.. means after its more moderation work and as you said time is valuable.. In a perfect world I would not want to moderate at all cause people don't mess stuff up.. For me moderating is splitting/merge topics on request or when they're obviously not related to each other/connected to each other. Locking stuff down when it goes out of control... which happens from time to time when people get frustrated.. Otheerwise I see myself just a normal user/dev doing dev stuff or spaming in the chit chat about chit chat stuff: that's what this subforum is for... As well as asking which TV box may or may not be a good pick can have a living there. If the new structure ends in more moderating we do things wrong, if it ends in less moderating we do stuff right.. as simple as it is.. The same reason I had a iphone for years and not an android phone.. I just had to think less where I find what I need. This got better in android world but I'm not sure if it got better in the forum over time but I don't think a more fine grained forum will help here. I can be wrong on that but people tend to post fast and think less means if they don't find the topic it will fit within page one they'l post it wherever they are at this moment.. Ask yourself.. when did you last go to page 3 or page 4 on a googlesearch? The same happens on forums.. And that's why I mostly refuse to answer to posts where the solution can be found within the first two pages of a googlesearch.. or if I do, I'll use something like https://lmgtfy.com/ to remind those people that things are easy as hell if you use the right search terms. I guess this behavior is now called being toxic - I somehow missed this change in social moves from "it's being a dickmove to waste someone else' time if it can be found with a random search engine" to "every stupid question is worth an answer an how dare you are if it's not written super welcoming and inclusive to everyone"... Back to topic: That may sound hard but: for your own sake, better learn to deal with it. Users are interested in: a working SBC with all the features a boardmaker claims (and mostly he sums up the capability of the SoC - mostly this features are based on what works on android and have barely something to do with what works on debian/ubuntu having a recent debian/ubuntu cause nobody wants to deal with something like trusty anymore but they mostly don't care about stuff like bootloader and kernel at all as long as it has the features they need. We still have a bunch of users using the 3.4 bsp kernel on allwinner and we soon ran into the same nightmare with rockchip 4.4 (at least in rockchips case there is a chance that they forward port this to a more recent kernel once android requires a newer kernel) using the most crappy powersupply they have somewhere laying around getting support ASAP cause their problem is for sure the most important one on the world Developers are interested in: solving some interesting parts which didn't work before dealing as less as possible with users cause their mess there nice: everything works world up and soak up the time for development having a few users for testing cause testing is boring bringing new boards up, cause board bring up is a way more interesting than board maintenance.. So you see your point: having a well organized forum doesn't really affect both of the mayor groups we're dealing here with.. There are only a few people interested in maintaining the forum and from those few even less are interested in reorganize stuff cause this means more maintenance work and explaining the users why things have changed and how it is supposed to work now. There is this nice little saying: Rome wasn't built in one day, I would add but Nero burned it down in one. To explain that a bit more, if a change breaks the current state may make sense but break existing behavior hence ends in more rebuilding/moderating. This may work as long as you have the fresh "spirit" of moderating things.. but can you keep this over time (means for years not only months)? Cause that's what is needed if we decide to moving around things or moderate more stuff. It's not a change things and everything will be fine, people will still post on the wrong threads and people will still have a wrong assumption what armbian is (a spare time project which tries to do it's best to support a variety of boards as good as possible with a recent kernel with flavors of ubuntu/debian with some tweaks here and there to make debian more useful on such boards e.g nand-sata-install, and tweaks around zram due to limited ram on most of this boards). Or to summarize most of it related to your new job as moderator.. be patient and accept that changes might need their time. And right reorganization of the forum might not be on high priory during a release. Especially that this release model is something we're more or less doing "the first time". Or at least it's done the first time that way as we do/try to do it yet. There's for sure a bunch of stuff I forgot to write up.. Disclaimer: as often.. this post may contain some sarcasm, some rants etc. (I may should have this in my signature for the future)...

it seems.. from the i2c map @piter75 shared I don't see a candidate fitting to bq25700... shame would've been a nice feature.. as much as I've love the powertree on page 3.. a not correct one is a pain to mess with..

I'll happily move your posts here then: https://forum.armbian.com/forum/31-sd-card-and-psu-issues/ sorry I couldn't resist.. I use the goat PSU called RPi USB-C PSU for most of my USB-C boards at the moment, until yet I didn't figure out a board which doesn't work as it should with it (my dirt cheap IKEA charger does also well but that one is used productive atm). btw is the bq25700 from page 3 really populated on the board? It might have some interesting features to mess with.. http://www.ti.com/product/BQ25700A (Input and Battery Current Monitor)

nope 12VDC ±10% (A, peak) 1.75 (https://cdn-reichelt.de/documents/datenblatt/E610/WDX0EFRX_DS.pdf) that's a solid 21W from your 60W PSU.. and likely the moment things go wrong..