Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Drop in to chat about anything, or just to introduce yourself in the welcome to the board thread!

Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby raulina » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:43 am

Dear all,

My name is Raul and I am a PhD student. I should say I am non-native english speaker, so I will make mistakes writing.

I bought a couple of wandboard Quad rev B1 back in 2014 or 2015 (I don't remember well) for my thesis mainly because it had 3 ports I2C, and I needed a couple of them, and because it had gigabit ethernet (I though it was a requisite, but it really wasn't, otherwise...). I barely had knowledge in embedded systems (I did a course in my bachelor, but nothing deeper than writing some codes and even a driver). I had had never compiled a kernel. Never had heard about device trees.

Maybe I was being naive, since I saw the SPI and the I2C ports in the expansion header in the datahseet, I think it wasn't crazy to think they were enabled. And then I found that they weren't.

- I needed to enable spidev, something I think it is not that unusual. I didn't find any clear guide in the forum or in the wiki.
- I needed to use 2 I2C ports, something I don't think either it is unusual (mostly considering that you sell it saying it has 3). In the datasheet you can clearly see 3 I2C ports in the expansion header, but why? One is not enabled, and if you enable it (I2C3) you will not be able to use ethernet. I didn't find any guide, tutorial, or whatever, explaining how to enable it, and if it was possible. In fact, I didn't find any warning when I bought it explaining that one of them was not usable if you wanted to use ethernet. I didn't find any warning about the problems on I2C1 because of the DDC.

I asked several questions in this forum and via email, and I only got answers for a silly question about a mechanical layout and when I posted a problem while enabling spidev, and you only complained on how I did it (the Cunningham's law). In fact, you gave me an incomplete answer (the pinctrl function code was missing), I am not sure if it was correct (why did I need to recompile the kernel if the modification suggested was for a device tree?), and I think it wasn't even a good practice (I remember I read somewhere that the modifications in the device tree should be done in imx6q-wandboard-revb1.dtsi and not in imx6qdl-wandboard.dtsi).

I was expecting much more support from Wandboard. Well, at least a bit of support. The wiki is almost empty. Nobody is answering mails. Some of the download links on the webpage are even broken. There is not an updated sdk in the website since 2014, neither a link to the Robert Nelson tutorial.

If my questions are so silly, or already answered, maybe it won't take you more than 5 minutes to copy a link to an other thread, or webpage, or manual where it is explained.
If the questions are complicate, maybe they deserve an answer or some documentation so other people can use it.

My experience has been totally frustrating with wandboard. I had many problems, that I learnt to solve not precisely thanks to you.

I am quite sure that I will avoid to work with wandboard in the future if I can.
raulina
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 3:23 pm

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby Tapani » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:06 am

All I2C channels and SPI should be enabled by default, and do not need anything. Spidev is a story in itself (the spidev driver maintainers have started changing things, and having an attitude that dont use spidev but instead add your devices to your devicetree). I2C should NOT be dependent on ethernet at all. Maybe I did get Cunninghamed right here :-)

The software repositories are now at
https://github.com/wandboard-org/linux/ ... 5_1.1.0_ga
and the demo images
ftp://download.technexion.net/demo_soft ... oard-imx6/
too bad I am not able to post these on the webserver.

Regarding your bad experiences, I don't know what to say - I believe your story, and saying sorry is not going to make it any better.
Tapani
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:32 am

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby Booleano » Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:12 pm

Hi I have to agree 100% with you.
You know what? I have just bought a Raspberry pi 3 model b+
Support is great and community is huge.
Maybe it is less performing than wandboard quad, but who cares? A pieve of hardware without software and support is useless.
I was thinking about booking the new wand pi . But after the bad experience with support and community I decided to give up. Raspberry pi forever and for much less money.
Booleano
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:29 pm

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby ClayMontgomery » Sun Apr 29, 2018 4:40 pm

The problem with the Raspberry Pi boards is that they have very weak GPUs and VPUs. It may not matter to you unless your application requires heavy video and/or 3D graphics. Kodi is a good example of an app that runs better on the Wandboard Quad because of this.

Regards, Clay
ClayMontgomery
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:14 pm

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby SteffUK » Tue May 01, 2018 4:33 pm

Unfortunately, I have to agree too. Have a look at my former post "Upcoming Wand...."
I guess I hit a nerve in regards to SATA with nearly 600 hits, but no feedback whatsoever!
It's a pity, but it seems like they have not understood the importance of the crowd around a project like this

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk
SteffUK
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:42 pm

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby Tapani » Wed May 02, 2018 8:52 am

Steff,

your message about sata was read a few days after you posted it, but it was difficult to respond since we were still under NDA.

The imx8M does not support SATA.

This was not 100% clear in the pre-release documentation we had at that time, so I did bring your suggestions to the hardware design team.
Their conclusion was that there is no 8M SATA driver or reference design, so even if the CPU might have had SATA they would not have dared to design around it.

Since then NXP official documentation has clarified that the imx8M does not support SATA.

//Tapani
Tapani
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:32 am

Re: Poor (or totally missing) support from Wandboard

Postby SteffUK » Sun May 06, 2018 11:42 am

Tapani wrote:Steff,

your message about sata was read a few days after you posted it, but it was difficult to respond since we were still under NDA.

The imx8M does not support SATA.

This was not 100% clear in the pre-release documentation we had at that time, so I did bring your suggestions to the hardware design team.
Their conclusion was that there is no 8M SATA driver or reference design, so even if the CPU might have had SATA they would not have dared to design around it.

Since then NXP official documentation has clarified that the imx8M does not support SATA.

//Tapani
Hi Tapani,

But that's exactly my point.
If it cannot be done for whatever reason, that's the one thing, but giving no feedback at all is something completely different.
Even a sentence like "We are looking into that" or any response, would have left the impression to NOT being ignored by you guys.

What a pity that SATA is not doable!

Greets
Stefan

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk
SteffUK
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:42 pm


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

cron