topic Re: Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error? in i.MX Processors

Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error?

PaulDeMetrotion — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:24:18 GMT

Can somebody provide some insight into a manufacturing tool issue I am facing. We have a new revision of a custom device based on the i.MX6Q processor. The previous revision worked and I was able to program our flash device. Here is the relevant data. After the file storage gadget is loaded the UUC protocol is not being loaded like before.

Here is the console output when it worked:

g_file_storage gadget: high speed config #1

uuc 0.4 [built Apr 25 2013 00:52:55]

UTP: Waiting for device to appear

UTP: file/device node /dev/utp already exists

cpu_id is 0

UTP: received command '$ flash_erase /dev/mtd0 0 0'

UTP: executing "flash_erase /dev/mtd0 0 0"

Erasing 64 Kibyte @ 30000 -- 100 % complete

Here is the output now:

g_file_storage gadget: high speed config #1

EXT3-fs: barriers not enabled

kjournald starting. Commit interval 5 seconds

The bottom of the MfgTool log output is here. Do you have any idea what could be wrong with the communication channel?

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOpreation[0]--OnDeviceChangeNotify, Volume Arrive/Remove or Device Arrive/Remove

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOpreation[0]--OnDeviceChangeNotify, m_p_usb_port is not NULL, so only refresh

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOpreation[0]--OnDeviceChangeNotify, Volume/Device Arrive

ModuleID[2] LevelID[1]: CmdOpreation[0]--set m_hDeviceArriveEvent.

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOpreation[0]--WaitforEvents device arrive1

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOperation[0] device chagned and reset to state 1

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: ExecuteCommand--Push[WndIndex:0], Body is $ flash_erase /dev/mtd0 0 0

ModuleID[2] LevelID[1]: PortMgrDlg(0)--MxHidDevice--Command Push(no file) excute failed

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CmdOperation[0], current command executed failed, so SetEvent(hDevCanDeleteEvent)

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CCmdOpreation[0] thread is Closed

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CCmdOpreation thread is Closed

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: DeviceManager::OnMsgDeviceEvent() - EVENT_KILL

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: CMyExceptionHandler::OnMsgExceptionEvent() - KillExceptionHandlerThread

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: Exception Handler thread is closed

ModuleID[2] LevelID[1]: delete MxHidDeviceClass

ModuleID[2] LevelID[10]: Device Manager thread is closed

Re: Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error?

PaulDeMetrotion — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 14:03:22 GMT

Some additional information that may be pertinent.

The only difference between the two MFG kernels is eight IOMUX settings were changed but nothing else was required. I have been tweaking the kernel for the past few months but have not changed anything within this section.

Another thing I should mention. Within my ucl2.xml the following command is where the process fails.

<CMD state="Updater" type="push" body="$ flash_erase /dev/mtd0 0 0">Erasing Boot partition</CMD>

If I execute the flash_erase command at the console prompt, it runs fine. So the kernel can handle the requested command. It appears that the UUC protocol is no longer being loaded.

Re: Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error?

VladanJovanovic — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 07:37:44 GMT

When you rebuilt kernel with new IOMUX settings, did you make two separate LTIB installs and builds - one for Linux kernel that is loaded during normal operation and the other for updater firmware kernel? These two have slightly separate configurations, and there's also different LTIB settings when building two different setups.

Re: Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error?

YixingKong — Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:01:48 GMT

Paul

Had your issue got resolved? If yes, we are going to close the discussion in 3 days. If you still need help please feel free to contact Freescale.

Thanks,
Yixing

Re: Manufacturing Tool Issue - Possible UUC Error?

YixingKong — Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:18:21 GMT

Paul

This discussion is closed since no activity. If you still need help, please feel free to reply with an update to this discussion, or create another discussion.

Thanks,

Yixing