Hi Ian, Ian Campbell <i...@hellion.org.uk> writes: > CONFIG_MARVELL_PHY doesn't appear to be set in the Wheezy kernel (which > doesn't have the necessary patches in any case). I'll make a note to > check the Sid kernel config as I apply this. Yeah, it’s not set currently in the Debian 3.8 kernel. It might be useful to file a wishlist bug against the 3.9 kernel as soon as it becomes available.
> BTW since Wheezy is now pretty deeply frozen and has 3.2 kernel I'm not > going to even bother trying to get any of this stuff into Wheezy I'm > afraid. I know ;-). > What is the eup stuff, i.e. what does it actually do and would a user > ever want to frob it directly rather than implicitly via the wol > command? Deep power saving. EUP = Energy-using Products, a EU directive for power saving. When you enable EUP, your qnap sleeps so deep, it will not react to the WOL magic packet. When deciding that you don’t need WOL and you want to save some power, you might decide to enable EUP as a user. > Do you know if there is some way to integrate the last two commands into > a standard "shutdown for WoL path" of some sort? Or can one run the > first two by and and then type halt(8) or poweroff(8) in the usual way > and have it just work? I use this systemd unit file to do that: [Unit] Description=Enable Wake on LAN on shutdown # Just for having the correct order when shutting down. After=qcontrold.service [Service] Type=oneshot RemainAfterExit=yes ExecStart=/sbin/ethtool -s eth0 wol d ExecStart=/usr/sbin/qcontrol wakeonlan off ExecStop=/sbin/ethtool -s eth0 wol g ExecStop=/usr/sbin/qcontrol wakeonlan on [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target I realize that systemd is a controversial topic in Debian, but I have no interest in doing anything similar for sysvinit. Feel free to adopt the idea if you want to. > Do you have a pointer to some docs on how to send a suitable WoL > packet? Get the MAC address via “ip link show dev eth0” (the thing after link/ether), then use “wakeonlan <mac-address” from another computer. > I'd probably s/wakeonlan/wol/ in the interface, because wol is a well > known acronym and I'm a lazy typist ;-) I’d recommend against that because then the patch diverges from what I’ve sent upstream and what I’m going to document soonish on my website. I’d hate to say “with recent qcontrol versions, use qcontrol wakeonlan on, but just on Debian, use qcontrol wol on for no good reason” :-). -- Best regards, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
