KachemakDiver Joined May 15, 2019 Messages 1,220 Reaction score 823 Age 62 Location Homer,Alaska Feb 8, 2021 #1 @quaddamage, wondering if you’ve seen this recovery kernel before? Attachments 367F52B0-AE2E-4402-B6A9-970617DC92E5.jpeg 2.2 MB · Views: 147
quaddamage Joined Jun 30, 2016 Messages 1,604 Reaction score 809 Location PL Feb 9, 2021 #2 Recovery kernel is usually older. This looks like someone flashed primary kernel in place of recovery. Flashing the same kernel in both places may actually be better - if primary fails, the board will work as usual, unless recovery fails as well.
Recovery kernel is usually older. This looks like someone flashed primary kernel in place of recovery. Flashing the same kernel in both places may actually be better - if primary fails, the board will work as usual, unless recovery fails as well.
KachemakDiver Joined May 15, 2019 Messages 1,220 Reaction score 823 Age 62 Location Homer,Alaska Feb 9, 2021 #3 quaddamage said: Recovery kernel is usually older. This looks like someone flashed primary kernel in place of recovery. Flashing the same kernel in both places may actually be better - if primary fails, the board will work as usual, unless recovery fails as well. Click to expand... Thank you @quaddamage for your assessment. I asked because I don’t recall seeing the recovery kernel at 0x920000 before, it’s always been 0x900000. The board checks out except for a ambarella failure.
quaddamage said: Recovery kernel is usually older. This looks like someone flashed primary kernel in place of recovery. Flashing the same kernel in both places may actually be better - if primary fails, the board will work as usual, unless recovery fails as well. Click to expand... Thank you @quaddamage for your assessment. I asked because I don’t recall seeing the recovery kernel at 0x920000 before, it’s always been 0x900000. The board checks out except for a ambarella failure.