Hi, thanks for the input. We will try it on our board.
However let me make a significant observation:
We had the same problem with USB: Our SW was working on an EASY board
but not on our HW. We thought it was hardware problem (but found
everything OK). After getting a patch from you it worked o
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:45 +0100, Conor O'Gorman wrote:
>
> The default a2p (adsl2+) is perhaps too strict? The 'a' option
> includes all 'a' variations:
>
> annex_a=04_01_04_00_00_01_00_00
> annex_at1=01_00_00_00_00_00_00_00
> annex_alite=00_01_00_00_00_00_00_00
> annex_admt=04_00_00_00_00_00_0
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:43 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 24/05/12 13:41, Conor O'Gorman wrote:
> > That patch didn't work. The -i is necessary. It's also a critical param,
> > as the first setting seems to stick till reboot. Which is annoying, as
> > all subsequent tests are pointless.
> >
> >
On 24/05/12 13:41, Conor O'Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 20:26 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
>> On 23/05/12 20:07, John Crispin wrote:
>> i think we should change this to not use xtu bits unless explicitly set
>> can you try with this patch applied ?
>>
>
> Success.
>
awesome :-) I wi
On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 20:26 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 23/05/12 20:07, John Crispin wrote:
> i think we should change this to not use xtu bits unless explicitly set
> can you try with this patch applied ?
>
Success.
That patch didn't work. The -i is necessary. It's also a critical par
On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 20:26 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 23/05/12 20:07, John Crispin wrote:
> i think we should change this to not use xtu bits unless explicitly set
> can you try with this patch applied ?
>
I effectively did that for the longer trace. See previous email.
"dsl_cpe_con
On 23/05/12 20:07, John Crispin wrote:
>
>>
>> The firmware reports identical:
>> DSL_CPE#>vig
>> nReturn=0 DSL_DriverVersionApi=3.24.4.4 DSL_ChipSetFWVersion=2.4.4.0.0.1
>> DSL_ChipSetHWVersion=1.5 DSL_ChipSetType=Ifx-Danube
>> DSL_DriverVersionMeiBsp=5.0.0
>> nReturn=0 DSL_DriverVersionApi=3.2
>
> The firmware reports identical:
> DSL_CPE#>vig
> nReturn=0 DSL_DriverVersionApi=3.24.4.4 DSL_ChipSetFWVersion=2.4.4.0.0.1
> DSL_ChipSetHWVersion=1.5 DSL_ChipSetType=Ifx-Danube
> DSL_DriverVersionMeiBsp=5.0.0
> nReturn=0 DSL_DriverVersionApi=3.24.4.4 DSL_ChipSetFWVersion=2.4.4.0.0.1
> DSL_C
On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 18:25 +0100, Conor O'Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 14:01 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> > On 21/05/12 22:14, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> > > On 21/05/2012 18:16, John Crispin wrote:
> > >> On 21/05/12 17:48, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> > >>> Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>> current
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 14:01 +0200, John Crispin wrote:
> On 21/05/12 22:14, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> > On 21/05/2012 18:16, John Crispin wrote:
> >> On 21/05/12 17:48, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
> >>> tri
On 21/05/12 22:14, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> On 21/05/2012 18:16, John Crispin wrote:
>> On 21/05/12 17:48, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
>>> tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
>>
On 21/05/2012 18:16, John Crispin wrote:
On 21/05/12 17:48, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
Hi all,
currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
OpenWRT trunk version we use. Our HW is totally identical to t
On 21/05/2012 18:14, Conor O'Gorman wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 17:48 +0200, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
Hi all,
currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
OpenWRT trunk version we use. Our HW is tota
On 21/05/12 17:48, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
> tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
> OpenWRT trunk version we use. Our HW is totally identical to that of
> Lantiq's RDK. We've also
On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 17:48 +0200, Spyridon Tompros wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
> tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
> OpenWRT trunk version we use. Our HW is totally identical to that of
> Lantiq
Hi all,
currently we test our last left-for-testing xDSL interface. The Danube
tries to synchronise but without result. Might be a SW problem of the
OpenWRT trunk version we use. Our HW is totally identical to that of
Lantiq's RDK. We've also used the add-on front-end of Lantiq's RDK in
the p
16 matches
Mail list logo
