|
tmbinc
|
 |
« Reply #120 on: August 23, 2009, 12:09:11 PM » |
|
For reference:
(Secondary) error code 0022 means:
The box switched on, so your SMC code works, but the CPU stopped booting at some point, but without signaling an errorcode (like 010x broken memory etc.) to the SMC. This is likely a corrupted image, or an image which doesn't work on your hardware. For example, trying to use the hack on an updated box would cause this error, but just flashing half of an image, or a broken image, will do the same.
For the tech-savvy, you can measure your POST OUT bus at this point (see the 8 connections required for downgrading). As the value will be static, just use a multimeter, and measure D7..D0 and convert binary to hex. If you post that code here, we can decode it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Please don't copy/quote full text outside this board. Instead, summarize and link to this post. Thanks! This lets me keep information updated and doesn't pull things out of context.
|
|
|
|
DarkstarTM
|
 |
« Reply #121 on: August 23, 2009, 12:19:27 PM » |
|
Hi, maybe the ECC calculation in NandPro is broken. This is what I tested: NandPro.exe lpt: -w16 xenon_hack.bin No errors. Xell works. NandPro.exe lpt: -r16 test_ecc.bin 0 1 NandPro.exe lpt: -R16 test_noecc.bin 0 1 test_noecc.bin now has 16384 Bytes, test_ecc.bin has 16896 Bytes. When I compare those two, test_ecc.bin has 16 Bytes of data inserted every 512 Bytes - just as expected. NandPro.exe lpt: +w16 test_noecc.bin 0 1 Write the file without ECC data and tell NandPro to "add ecc and block markers to ecc less input file". NandPro.exe lpt: -r16 test_ecc2.bin 0 1 Read the raw data again. Now test_ecc.bin and test_ecc2.bin are NOT the same as they should be (at least to my understanding). I am not sure what exactly happens, but the data is messed up after 528 (!) Bytes. So the first ECC seems to be ok. This might be the reason why flashing compiled Xell binaries to block 0x40 does not work as reported by some people here (it doesn't work for me, too).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tiros
|
 |
« Reply #122 on: August 23, 2009, 01:38:26 PM » |
|
NandPro.exe lpt: +w16 test_noecc.bin 0 1
Theres a typo in the documentation  Upper case means non raw file. So the command is NandPro.exe +W16 test_noecc.bin To add ecc to say a xell.bin that doesnt have ecc. +w is intended to "correct" ecc for files/blocks that already have ecc in them, but maybe wrong due to a hex edit. Noticed a small bug with +W, where it only works for the first x100 blocks, and possibly miscalculates the block count next version will fix this.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 23, 2009, 01:41:17 PM by Tiros »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arakon
|
 |
« Reply #123 on: August 23, 2009, 01:44:11 PM » |
|
eh.. is it normal for the block count to go from 9 (+w) to 121 (+W)?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do NOT give support by email, PM, ICQ or whatever. Anyone annoying me that way will have his balls removed. With a rusty butterknife. Slowly. And I'll enjoy doing it.
|
|
|
|
Tiros
|
 |
« Reply #124 on: August 23, 2009, 01:46:22 PM » |
|
eh.. is it normal for the block count to go from 9 (+w) to 121 (+W)?
No just don't use it for now, the fix out maybe later today.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Auster
Newbie

Posts: 2
|
 |
« Reply #125 on: August 23, 2009, 02:45:09 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DarkstarTM
|
 |
« Reply #126 on: August 23, 2009, 03:07:43 PM » |
|
NandPro.exe lpt: +w16 test_noecc.bin 0 1
Theres a typo in the documentation  Upper case means non raw file. So the command is NandPro.exe +W16 test_noecc.bin Ah! Works now.  And updating XeLL works, too. So, let's recapitulate that: -r# read from flash and write 528 Byte blocks without touching ECC to file -R# read from flash and write 512 Byte blocks without ECC to file -w# read 528 Byte blocks from file and write them to flash without touching ECC +w# read 528 Byte blocks from file overwrite their ECC and write to flash +W# read 512 Byte blocks from file add correct ECC and write to flash Correct?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arakon
|
 |
« Reply #127 on: August 23, 2009, 03:31:06 PM » |
|
hrm.. didn't work for me.. black screen again. block size increased by 1 and all, but it still won't launch when injected into the flashed xenon_hack.bin.
which file exactly did you inject, Darkstar?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do NOT give support by email, PM, ICQ or whatever. Anyone annoying me that way will have his balls removed. With a rusty butterknife. Slowly. And I'll enjoy doing it.
|
|
|
|
DarkstarTM
|
 |
« Reply #128 on: August 23, 2009, 04:00:50 PM » |
|
which file exactly did you inject, Darkstar?
xell-1f.bin, using the following command: NandPro.exe lpt: -W16 xell-1f.bin 40 9
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arakon
|
 |
« Reply #129 on: August 23, 2009, 04:07:26 PM » |
|
-W or +W?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do NOT give support by email, PM, ICQ or whatever. Anyone annoying me that way will have his balls removed. With a rusty butterknife. Slowly. And I'll enjoy doing it.
|
|
|
|
DarkstarTM
|
 |
« Reply #130 on: August 23, 2009, 04:19:56 PM » |
|
-W or +W?
Doesn't matter - it works with +W and -W
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Arakon
|
 |
« Reply #131 on: August 23, 2009, 04:25:07 PM » |
|
hrm.. got the exact same result as before.. black screen.
edit: could you upload a dump of your xell.bin (read it from the nand again so the ecc data is in there), so I can run a compare to mine?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 23, 2009, 04:29:26 PM by Arakon »
|
Logged
|
I do NOT give support by email, PM, ICQ or whatever. Anyone annoying me that way will have his balls removed. With a rusty butterknife. Slowly. And I'll enjoy doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
woop
|
 |
« Reply #133 on: August 23, 2009, 05:33:35 PM » |
|
Ive tryed the same and still just get a black screen. I also have the latest compiled xell. any help?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Helltick
|
 |
« Reply #134 on: August 23, 2009, 06:08:41 PM » |
|
i have run into a snag here, while reading the nand i always get an error at block 1FE it always reads through and ends at 03ff but its still an error...every time.  i have dumped the nand on this box 5 times now with the same 250 error everytime. they look the same in HHD hex editor, ms copyright etc... however when i compare in command prompt as tiros suggested they differ?  i assume something is wrong here or is this normal? thanks for your time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
utar
|
 |
« Reply #135 on: August 23, 2009, 06:16:10 PM » |
|
I had two 250 errors on my dumps and there was a one byte difference between the dumps. I took an educated risk and did a reflash which worked fine, however YMMV.
[Edit: only the start of the xenon_hack.bin actually has any data in it, the rest is zeroed out, if your bad block (which is what I assume a 250 error is) is outside this data area you will probably be safe. However as ever it's at your own risk]
Utar
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 23, 2009, 06:22:42 PM by utar »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Helltick
|
 |
« Reply #136 on: August 23, 2009, 06:26:08 PM » |
|
f#ck i would really to carry on here but am to freaked out, why cant they just be the same dammit  i did a compare in hhd editor and there were differences aswell. i suppose worst case would be stuck in xell forever?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
utar
|
 |
« Reply #137 on: August 23, 2009, 06:31:50 PM » |
|
Well if you are never going to go back to the original MS firmware then you probably have nothing to lose as even if you manage to trash the nand this doesn't prevent you from doing another flash.
Personally I did this on a totally separate 360 from the unmodified one I use for games and Live so this wasn't an issue for me, and I also have a number of others which was the other reason I took the risk.
Utar
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Helltick
|
 |
« Reply #138 on: August 23, 2009, 06:36:10 PM » |
|
well i bought this one as a rrod for $50 and fixed it, i also have 2 others sitting here. i dont have much to lose, so im just gonna go for it...f*** it! thanks man.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
utar
|
 |
« Reply #139 on: August 23, 2009, 06:38:52 PM » |
|
np, let me know how it goes. Don't worry if you get an error during the flash on the same block numbers. I got this on one of my blocks where I had a 250 error while reading (although interestingly not on the other block where I also got a 250)
Utar
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|