Jump to content

Orange Pi R1 Plus (Orange Pi R1+) support?

Ford_Prefect

By Ford_Prefect
in Rockchip

 Share

Recommended Posts

JonatasPrust

JonatasPrust

Posted
Posted
  On 5/11/2021 at 6:58 AM, Vasco said:

Thank you for bringing support to this board. I tried latest image (Buster and Focal) and couldn't boot.

 

It always ends up with:

  

Gave up waiting for root file system device.  Common problems:
 - Boot args (cat /proc/cmdline)
   - Check rootdelay= (did the system wait long enough?)
 - Missing modules (cat /proc/modules; ls /dev)
ALERT!  UUID=e5dd5e3a-06ae-43df-964d-5e3c5dc07a7f does not exist.  Dropping to a shell!
(initramfs)

 

Here is the full boot sequence (2 boots):

https://pastebin.com/CNssk1uG

 

Tried with 3 differentt Sandisk Ultra and also with Etcher (Linux and Windows) and Rufus.

 

Anything else I could try?

 

Thanks

Expand  

 

Same problem with the image "Suitable for Testing - OrangePI R1 PLUS", then i used a image of "RockPI E", and have booted on UART0. But i dont have suficient knowledge on linux to help on development.

Is there any forecast to have a stable version for this card?

Thanks

 

0
Igor

Igor

Posted
Posted
  On 6/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, JonatasPrust said:

But i dont have suficient knowledge on linux to help on development.

Expand  


We need many different profiles of people to run this project and just about any help, help on development. Since in other case developers have to fix web pages, developers have to run projects, developers have to seek for money, developers have to maintain servers, developers have to maintain forum, developers have to moderate forums, developers have to maintain infrastructure, developers have to maintain relations with partners, developers have to waste time on repeated support question, developers have to deal with "customers", ...

 

  On 6/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, JonatasPrust said:

Is there any forecast to have a stable version for this card?

Expand  


This is amateur supported development so this information can't be provided. We don't know when things will become stable - that is the most expensive part. If we stop with development, we only gain - I would say you should do something about.

0
atomic77

atomic77

Posted
Posted

I recently got my hands on an R1+ and was able to get it booted with a RockPi-E buster image, though I get the same error when I try to use any of the orangepi-r1plus images.

 

Since I have the hardware, I'd be open to making the needed changes to get this particular board to work in a PR to the armbian/build repo. Can anyone give me any pointers to what might need to change in the orangepi-r1plus image to get there?

0
Igor

Igor

Posted
Posted
  On 7/28/2021 at 9:50 PM, atomic77 said:

Can anyone give me any pointers to what might need to change in the orangepi-r1plus image to get there?

Expand  


I think we have to get rid of our Nanopi R2S patch since I would assume mainline version is just fine and cleaned out. Then adjusting R1 related commits accordingly. Also one quick look into u-boot if upstream version is good enough to boot the board properly and remove patches there too.

And it should work.

 

https://armbian.atlassian.net/browse/AR-573

1
atomic77

atomic77

Posted
Posted

I finally had some time this weekend to dig into this. It's my first exposure to the armbian kernel build process and device tree files, so please forgive any stupid questions! I made a first attempt at the changes on my github fork.

 

I was not able to get the kernel built if I completely removed the nanopi-r2s patch as there was some extra dependencies on rockchip-ddr.h. So I started by removing the rev00/rev20 DTS files that seemed to conflict with the mainline, and tried to find any references to the old files and change them.

 

What isn't clear to me is should I be also rewriting the u-boot patch files based on the upstream kernel version as well ? Are those copied completely from the source tree?

 

When I try to boot, I get an error - is there a way I can get more details on what has gone wrong?

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I hope I'm not too far off course with my changes, any help is appreciated!

0
Igor

Igor

Posted
Posted
  On 9/6/2021 at 2:30 PM, atomic77 said:

any help is appreciated!

Expand  


I can only give you one hint at this stage. Kernel 5.14.y is coming (WIP, not finished yet) with improved support for Nanopi R2S. I would propose to start from there. It is too troublesome to back port to 5.10.y We can ship EDGE (5.14.y) variant only.

 

  On 9/6/2021 at 2:30 PM, atomic77 said:

What isn't clear to me is should I be also rewriting the

Expand  


Of course. If not else, this for sure.

0
atomic77

atomic77

Posted
Posted

I tried a build of 5.14 and made a couple of adjustments in u-boot-rockchip64-edge/add-board-orangepi-r1plus to include the rk3328-nanopi-r2s.dtb file instead of the rk3328-nanopi-r2-rev00.dtb, but the board doesn't come up and has the same issue reported originally:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

What I don't quite get is why nanopi r2s is the basis for the r1 plus image, though the device tree seems to be quite different from the rock pi e, which seems to work pretty well without any adjustments at all?

 

 

0
bemapiu86

bemapiu86

Posted
Posted

i just install debian , ubuntu and armbian , but i cannot install remote desktop for any os . I try vnc,TigerVNC.....

 

Anyone know how to remote from win10 to orange pi r1 plus ?

Please show me.

 

Thank so much

0

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Guidelines

  I accept