Did a brick my v4?

This forum is for Marvell Kirkwood devices such as the GoFlex Home/Net, PogoPlug v1/v2, SheevaPlug, and ZyXEL devices.

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby schn4rk » Thu Feb 16, 2012 1:34 am

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lemwad', 'I') interpreted "top usb port" as the top port on the back. I guess I needed a big sticker on the device that says "Open here, Derp."
The fix worked fine. Thanks.

Glad that helped someone else :) That's exactly the problem I had.

Suggestion for the devs: It would be awesome if a note could be added to the install instructions to avoid this happening to others. For some of us, the v4 is our first pogoplug, and IMO the instructions are otherwise perfectly clear.

I do have some background in linux and now that I've settled into using my plug, I've taken a look at the v4 install shell script - I get the feeling that a difference with this model is that the boot params are set to not check sdb1 for rootfs, and if you install uboot while using the back port mounted as sda1, it stays assigned that way on reboot and you're SOL. I could be wrong, but that would explain why WarheadsSE's suggestion didn't work for the OP or myself.

Don't get me wrong, I see this as a feature - we don't want our v4s trying to boot from the back USB ports if they won't work. But while this is the case, the extra-clear warning seems like an even better idea to me. Just my 2c! :geek:
schn4rk
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:55 am

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby WarheadsSE » Thu Feb 16, 2012 1:58 am

The real issue here is that the u-boot does not have access to the USB3.0 ports (blue), thus it is unusable.
Core Developer
Remember: Arch Linux ARM is entirely community donation supported!
WarheadsSE
Developer
 
Posts: 6807
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 2:12 pm

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby kmihelich » Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:18 am

I don't see how the instructions are anything but perfectly clear, as the SATA port is mentioned twice in the same line as "USB 2.0" in context with "top," in the context of "the device" as seen on the main page has no other possible meaning than the actual top of the device. The back is not, obviously, the top of the device. Also worth noting is that USB 3.0 ports are very much blue, which unless you're unfortunately colorblind, is a stark contrast to the black that has been seen for the last decade. There's a point to dumbing down instructions where we have to draw a line, and this would be one of them. We used to do things like use bold, change colors, fonts, italicize, and it has been proven that no matter how succinctly we describe an operation with any number of cosmetic enhancements to further emphasize, points will be missed.

The boot params were specifically set up, by myself, to accommodate any boot device configuration that was presented, whether the rootfs was on USB or SATA, and whether or not you had a regular data drive plugged into the other slot at boot. As U-Boot does not support booting from USB 3.0, drive assignments based on any drives that may or may not be present in those ports is obviously not included, because there is no way to check.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('http://archlinuxarm.org/platforms/armv5/pogoplug-series-4', 'B')ooting into Arch Linux ARM is only supported from storage devices using either the SATA or USB 2.0 port on the top of the device. There is no U-Boot support for either SD or USB 3.0 booting.
Arch Linux ARM exists and continues to grow through community support, please donate today!
kmihelich
Developer
 
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:55 am
Location: aka leming #archlinuxarm

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby schn4rk » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:17 am

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WarheadsSE', 'T')he real issue here is that the u-boot does not have access to the USB3.0 ports (blue), thus it is unusable.

Just to clarify - I understand that, the issue is just that if you go through the install process with the USB stick in one of those back ports, uboot won't be able to boot from the top USB 2.0 port either. That's why it's necessary to then revert the plug and start from scratch. It's an issue several of us have experienced - a minor issue to be sure, and I don't mean to say there is anything wrong with uboot or alarm, but this thread wouldn't exist if a few of us hadn't experienced it.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kmihelich', 'I') don't see how the instructions are anything but perfectly clear, as the SATA port is mentioned twice in the same line as "USB 2.0" in context with "top," in the context of "the device" as seen on the main page has no other possible meaning than the actual top of the device. The back is not, obviously, the top of the device. Also worth noting is that USB 3.0 ports are very much blue, which unless you're unfortunately colorblind, is a stark contrast to the black that has been seen for the last decade. There's a point to dumbing down instructions where we have to draw a line, and this would be one of them. We used to do things like use bold, change colors, fonts, italicize, and it has been proven that no matter how succinctly we describe an operation with any number of cosmetic enhancements to further emphasize, points will be missed.


I apologise if my post gave the impression that I thought the instructions aren't clear. The fact that only a few of us have had this problem proves how clear they are, and how issue-free the install process is. I honestly didn't want to sound ungrateful!

That said, a subtle rephrasing of only one line would help avoid any more misunderstandings. Currently it states at the beginning: "Only the top ports (USB 2.0 and SATA) can be used for the root filesystem." I propose the following change: "Only the USB 2.0 and SATA ports on the top of the device can be used for the root filesystem."

Anyway, it's just a suggestion, it's a minor issue, and it's the only criticism I have. I really want to stress that I am very grateful for all the hard work you guys have put, and continue to put, into developing alarm & uboot for all these devices. I appreciate how frustrating it can be when people ask dumb questions and make demands all the time as if you owe them something, it's probably a thankless task a lot of the time. So... thank you :mrgreen:
schn4rk
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:55 am
Top

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby kmihelich » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:28 am

If the steps were followed correctly for creating the drive with the root filesystem using the USB3 ports, there's no reason it shouldn't boot when you move it to the USB2 port. I regularly re-image SATA drives using a SATA->USB cable, then unplug it from the cable and dock it into a SATA port. Nothing has changed with the drive, data is data.
Arch Linux ARM exists and continues to grow through community support, please donate today!
kmihelich
Developer
 
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:55 am
Location: aka leming #archlinuxarm

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby schn4rk » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:01 am

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kmihelich', 'I')f the steps were followed correctly for creating the drive with the root filesystem using the USB3 ports, there's no reason it shouldn't boot when you move it to the USB2 port. I regularly re-image SATA drives using a SATA->USB cable, then unplug it from the cable and dock it into a SATA port. Nothing has changed with the drive, data is data.

I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work either, but it doesn't. That's why I suspect the issue in this situation is not with the rootfs install but the uboot install.

My understanding is that the uboot install process involves setting certain environment parameters. I can't help but wonder if setting these parameters while a USB 3.0 port is mounted at /dev/sda1 might cause an issue. Please excuse me if that has nothing to do with it! :oops:
schn4rk
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:55 am
Top

Re: Did a brick my v4?

Postby kmihelich » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:56 am

U-Boot only goes as far as loading the kernel. The kernel SCSI driver assigns those /dev/sd* devices. Drives don't care how they're connected. Like I said above, I frequently re-image using USB even though it ends up being plugged in as SATA. If the drive didn't work after it was set up when it was built through the USB3 port, either something in the stock firmware is screwing with things that I didn't catch, or it just wasn't set up right (the case more often than not, a minute detail skipped over).
Arch Linux ARM exists and continues to grow through community support, please donate today!
kmihelich
Developer
 
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:55 am
Location: aka leming #archlinuxarm

Previous

Return to Marvell Kirkwood

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron