I’m writing a script to help customise nano system images, and I want to make sure I’m getting the part numbers correct so it runs create-jetson-nano-sd-card-image.sh with the correct parameters.
SDKM lists “P3448-0000” for my development board. I assume “P3448-0020” is the production module based on the SDKM dropdown. My question is how these map to the parameters “create-jetson-nano-sd-card-image.sh” expects. That script has this:
I assume 100 (a01) and 200 (a02) map to P3448-0000 and 300 (b00) maps to P3448-0020, however later on in the script, the value for dtb_id is hard-coded, overriding this choice.
Is this a mistake or do I simply not need to worry about what value is specified since a02 will always work, on both development and production modules? I’ve used a02 in the past to make sd card images that work on my board but don’t have a production module to test with. Are SD card images always compatible?
Lastly, I’m a bit confused as to what these part numbers mean since they don’t seem to be used anywhere else but are referred to as a “complete list of part numbers” on this page. Do Jetsons have two sets of part numbers, and if so, is there a mapping somewhere between them?
I see. Thank you for the clarification. I was confused because the “b00” dtb id was in the SD card script’s options. I don’t have a production module and assumed it did have a card slot by the content of the script and some of the functions (signed image support, comments, etc.). I will ignore production module support for what I am developing until I read more about its flashing procedure. I assume it’s closer to flashing a Xavier, which I have and will be the next for support.
mdegans, Wayne answered your exact question about sd card image creation script and production module… but note a future revision of the developer kit will ship with a module having PCB revision B01. So, it is relevant for sd card image creation script to generate B0x sd card images. In fact, the sd card image we host for download is already a B01 sd card image, and everyone is using it in their devkits wit A02 module.
Does that clarify things? The production module has had PCB revision B01 from the beginning, and the devkit will move to using that same module PCB revision in the future (while still having microSD card instead of eMMC, etc.)
Basically, everyone should be using B0x options for everything, since it works with A02 modules and of course will work for any B0x modules.
Mostly. I apologise if I have been unclear. Anyway it is not very important. I have figured out what P344* model number maps to which appropriate options and will pass them in anyway. I have what I need for the utility i’m working on.
If I think properly, the 260 pin definition in A02 board is different with B01?
I design my own carrier board referred to Jetson_Nano_Product_Design_Guide, it works well if I insert B01 into it and works bad if A02 inserted?
Looking at this I see some things about a b0x image being compatible with a02, however in our testing that has not been the case on a custom carrier board.
Our build DOES work on a B00 we believe. We want to know if there is any reason it could not work on a B01?
Also, on a running system, from Tegra Linux, how do we check the exact processor version running? The results from running sudo i2cdump -f -y 2 0x50 do not give me an indication, that gives p3448-0000-400.