Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread David Woodhouse
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 15:06 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> The proper long term solution is to make sure that the kernel does the > >> right thing and doesn't require userspace fixup for these devices. >> > > As per previous discussion, this just isn't going to happen on lantiq. > > Well, doing a

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 15:06 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2012-12-08 2:51 PM, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 14:44 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> As for the time when hotplug is running wrt. loaded modules - normally > >> udevtrigger should take care of generating the rig

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread Felix Fietkau
On 2012-12-08 2:51 PM, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 14:44 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> As for the time when hotplug is running wrt. loaded modules - normally >> udevtrigger should take care of generating the right events. > > Modules are loaded before any of this is possible

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 14:44 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > As for the time when hotplug is running wrt. loaded modules - normally > udevtrigger should take care of generating the right events. Modules are loaded before any of this is possible, in /etc/init.d/boot as currently written. > I was sugg

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread Felix Fietkau
On 2012-12-08 2:34 PM, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 10:49 +, David Woodhouse wrote: >> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 18:58 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: >> > > > OK, but hotplug never generates any atm events, so Felix suggested this >> > > > instead. >> > > >> > > Hm, it shou

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 10:49 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 18:58 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > > OK, but hotplug never generates any atm events, so Felix suggested this > > > > instead. > > > > > > Hm, it should do. We have other scripts in /etc/hotplug.d/atm, and

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-08 Thread David Woodhouse
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 18:58 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > OK, but hotplug never generates any atm events, so Felix suggested this > > > instead. > > > > Hm, it should do. We have other scripts in /etc/hotplug.d/atm, and > > hotplug2.rules definitely *looks* like it should be invoking them

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 22:12 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:59 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > It'd be better to put that in /etc/hotplug.d/atm so that you don't have > > > to worry about the timing of when the atm driver loads at startup, and > > > it gets done pro

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread David Woodhouse
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:59 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > It'd be better to put that in /etc/hotplug.d/atm so that you don't have > > to worry about the timing of when the atm driver loads at startup, and > > it gets done properly if the driver is ever unloaded and reloaded, etc. > > > > O

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:59 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 20:56 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:34 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > Index: target/linux/lantiq/base-files/etc/init.d/ifx-esi > > > ==

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 20:56 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:34 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > Index: target/linux/lantiq/base-files/etc/init.d/ifx-esi > > === > > --- target/linux/lantiq/base-files/etc/i

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread David Woodhouse
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:34 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > Index: target/linux/lantiq/base-files/etc/init.d/ifx-esi > === > --- target/linux/lantiq/base-files/etc/init.d/ifx-esi (revision 0) > +++ target/linux/lantiq/base-files/e

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:24 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:15 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 07:40 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 10:35 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > > > > I don't want to drag this out longer

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 12:15 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 07:40 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 10:35 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > > > I don't want to drag this out longer than necessary. You used the phrase > > > 'hack'. What do you think i

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-12-07 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 07:40 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 10:35 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > > I don't want to drag this out longer than necessary. You used the phrase > > 'hack'. What do you think is the preferred solution? > > If I had a better one, I would have use

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-29 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 10:35 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > I don't want to drag this out longer than necessary. You used the phrase > 'hack'. What do you think is the preferred solution? If I had a better one, I would have used it. RFC, again. ___ openw

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-29 Thread Conor O'Gorman
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 17:24 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > The config option is already in place, as I said above. The sensible > default _is_ the increment, which is what the vast majority of DSL > routers do. In most of the AR7 ones, however, this incremented MAC is > already a separate boot

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 00:32 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > br2684 picks that address if there is no 'set' mac and if the lower > level provides nothing. It is a valid address, Xerox. Whether or not it is technically valid might be rather open to interpretation at the other end. The validity of a M

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Conor O'Gorman
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 00:17 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 14:35 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > The br2684 driver seems to expect that the MAC is already on the device > > before a virtual circuit is created, but it seems to leave the mechanism > > for doing so to the A

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread David Woodhouse
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 16:28 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 00:17 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > I mostly use that with PPPoA, rather than PPPoEoA with the pointless MTU > > breakage that that implies. But it does work fine with BR2684 with the > > MAC address 00:00:01:0

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 00:17 +, David Woodhouse wrote: > I mostly use that with PPPoA, rather than PPPoEoA with the pointless MTU > breakage that that implies. But it does work fine with BR2684 with the > MAC address 00:00:01:00:00:00, which is what it ends up with. > > Do you actually *need* t

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread David Woodhouse
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 14:35 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > The br2684 driver seems to expect that the MAC is already on the device > before a virtual circuit is created, but it seems to leave the mechanism > for doing so to the ATM driver. The only other working ATM driver in > OpenWrt is for A

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 19:35 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Thank you for consider my comments. > > There are a couple of points I'd make. AFAIK this is only needed for > ethernet bridging over atm. I am not familiar with an ethernet style > mac > being used in straight atm connecti

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Conor O'Gorman
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 06:18 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 10:09 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > > This will affect all lantiq atm boards? I specify an ethernet MAC via > > the command line, but I don't necessarily want it in the atm. > > > The existing code leaves the MA

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 10:09 +, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > This will affect all lantiq atm boards? I specify an ethernet MAC via > the command line, but I don't necessarily want it in the atm. > > > Conor > The existing code leaves the MAC at all zeros. Do you require that instead of the MAC yo

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-28 Thread Conor O'Gorman
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 23:09 -0800, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 07:53 +0100, John Crispin wrote: > > On 28/11/12 02:47, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > > This corrects a few oversights in mach-netgear.c, adds a diag.sh with > > > per-board conditionals, in line with the uci-defa

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-27 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 07:53 +0100, John Crispin wrote: > On 28/11/12 02:47, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > This corrects a few oversights in mach-netgear.c, adds a diag.sh with > > per-board conditionals, in line with the uci-defaults "leds" file, fixes > > the Netgear eth0 MAC address detection, a

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-27 Thread John Crispin
On 28/11/12 02:47, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: This corrects a few oversights in mach-netgear.c, adds a diag.sh with per-board conditionals, in line with the uci-defaults "leds" file, fixes the Netgear eth0 MAC address detection, and provides a mechanism for the DSL driver to have a preset MAC addr

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lantiq and Netgear fixes/enhancements

2012-11-27 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
This corrects a few oversights in mach-netgear.c, adds a diag.sh with per-board conditionals, in line with the uci-defaults "leds" file, fixes the Netgear eth0 MAC address detection, and provides a mechanism for the DSL driver to have a preset MAC address. Signed-off-by: Daniel Gimpelevich Index