From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-x234.google.com (mail-qa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78DF021F113 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:20:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id j15so6883561qaq.25 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:20:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=4nD4dYik+u8l2vUVxtUQdiIwtnBCFGRRUl/6tp6dVJw=; b=mK1takSL6cTQrgLKdioLWf/M3cEOo6o2rn+Kp8ec1ArUK1wR5U6ETDj3V7OP8i9ldb LM54LEQzT8omhWk7O5ifMmFKhQ0ooJFN64VeC867J1jyxCyqb+0SX7s+bnOKhrGXEFTn DsPhHZN6xP3efQofudcENRtwr//a9hhQvhS/Es6FXMDFYBpBjI6NDF04pbbUP9xULrl7 mJbRUFV0KBdVyDQqjZ0jSZtRlb8mlpVy3jj8+rhaWWUEnu2+uLrctHUhXn7azYM87D// Nkx9rKb1LYVXu7oZp694xWNjbFCsGutVy5bb0OCzYzCsYNdtpF9XoQzVzOzPGPC3QGOa NnuA== X-Received: by 10.224.161.5 with SMTP id p5mr2822263qax.32.1389705615404; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:20:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from richs-mbp-2114.home.lan ([64.223.225.159]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f19sm563289qaq.12.2014.01.14.05.20.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:20:14 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D1B5991D-FA85-4D04-9805-953818EAFAE4" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:20:12 -0500 Message-Id: References: <871u0aew48.fsf@toke.dk> To: David Personette X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Toke_H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] notes on going for a stable release X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:20:23 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_D1B5991D-FA85-4D04-9805-953818EAFAE4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Since I kicked off this thread, let me second what David and Toke have = said. I used the wrong word - "stable" - when I really wanted a new stake in = the ground. Our first was CeroWrt 3.7.5-2 - it was great. I used it for = a long time before these newer builds got even better and I was willing = to risk family ire. (So far, so good with 3.10.24-8).=20 To continue to attract attention, I'd love to be able to post news about = 3.10 on the main page of the Bufferbloat site. This would give a signal = to technically savvy people that we're alive and kicking and making good = things. (And many thanks for the outpouring of love and offers to help = that have come in from some of the new members!) We're still a research project. (Nobody has time for World Domination = :-) A stable release with 1-2 year maintenance, etc. is *way* beyond our = grasp. But I was hoping for another teaser build that addresses the = worst of the problem that Dave identified. Best, Rich Obligatory performance stats for 3.10.24-8. IPv4 only for the moment on = my WNDR3700v2. I had to reset one of my Wifi interfaces the other day. root@cerowrt:~# uptime 07:57:57 up 7 days, 20:04, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.04 root@cerowrt:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/mips/unaligned_instructions 25561 root@cerowrt:~# dmesg | grep "TX DMA" [114502.492187] ath: phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x084! [114504.027343] ath: phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x006! root@cerowrt:~# dmesg | grep "checksum failed" root@cerowrt:~# dmesg | tail -5 [559339.007812] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join [559342.328125] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join [559344.812500] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join [559344.847656] gw01: Creating new IBSS network, BSSID 32:96:29:8f:34:d8 [559344.855468] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): gw01: link becomes ready root@cerowrt:~# On Jan 14, 2014, at 7:51 AM, David Personette wrote: > I agree with Toke on this, cerowrt with a single supported router was = never about mass adoption. I think everyone using it is in the self = selected group of people that knew enough about networking to find why = their internet connection was *breaking* for interactive use, then go = out and buy a router that cost 2x-3x what other similar specification = consumer units cost. As far as I recall, initial installation required = TFTP. Not a real hurdle for many of us, but quite a barrier to the = normal consumer. I've been using it for my primary router for over a = year now, and have been very happy with it's stability and reliability. = I've had to roll back a few builds, but no real issues otherwise. People = that are here, are here to be where all the new development of consumer = level implementations of internet protocols and things getting fixed is = happening. My 2 cents. >=20 > --=20 > David P. >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:44 AM, Toke H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen = wrote: > Christopher Robin writes: >=20 > > ***Are we here for research and development, or are we here for = final > > implementation? >=20 > I've always thought about CeroWRT as an R&D project. As Dave points = out > I don't think it's realistic to provide a "stable" release in the = sense > of having it upgraded and maintained. At least not as things stand = now. > However, designating a release as "stable" in the same way as the > previous one (i.e. something that won't crash and where most or all of > the advertised features (mostly) work) would probably be a good idea. > In particular, crash bugs and things that are completely broken should > probably be fixed? >=20 >=20 > As far as my installation goes: >=20 > # cat /sys/kernel/debug/mips/unaligned_instructions > 154737 > # uptime > 10:39:18 up 5 days, 10:56, load average: 0.05, 0.03, 0.04 > # dmesg | grep "TX DMA" > [348064.371093] ath: phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x004! > # dmesg | grep "checksum failed" > [13551.957031] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [16072.535156] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [22734.054687] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [93252.820312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [96253.570312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [106396.003906] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [156808.253906] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [163650.000000] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [224205.101562] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [269216.191406] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [276718.035156] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [316807.695312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [329890.929687] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [333792.148437] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [399208.269531] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [410070.828125] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [435757.078125] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [441458.539062] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] > [449560.417968] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] >=20 >=20 > I've had to re-initialise the wifi a couple of times for no apparent > reason, and one or two reboots necessary, but nothing that major... >=20 > -Toke >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --Apple-Mail=_D1B5991D-FA85-4D04-9805-953818EAFAE4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Since = I kicked off this thread, let me second what David and Toke have = said.

I used the wrong word - "stable" - when I = really wanted a new stake in the ground. Our first was CeroWrt 3.7.5-2 - = it was great. I used it for a long time before these newer builds got = even better and I was willing to risk family ire. (So far, so good with = 3.10.24-8). 

To continue to attract = attention, I'd love to be able to post news about 3.10 on the main page = of the Bufferbloat site. This would give a signal to technically savvy = people that we're alive and kicking and making good things. (And many = thanks for the outpouring of love and offers to help that have come in = from some of the new members!)

We're still = a research project. (Nobody has time for World Domination :-) A stable = release with 1-2 year maintenance, etc. is *way* beyond our grasp. But I = was hoping for another teaser build that addresses the worst of the = problem that Dave = identified.

Best,

= Rich

Obligatory performance stats for = 3.10.24-8. IPv4 only for the moment on my WNDR3700v2. I had to reset one = of my Wifi interfaces the other = day.

root@cerowrt:~# = uptime
 07:57:57 up 7 days, 20:04,  load average: = 0.00, 0.01, 0.04
root@cerowrt:~# cat = /sys/kernel/debug/mips/unaligned_instructions
25561
ro= ot@cerowrt:~# dmesg | grep "TX DMA"
[114502.492187] ath: phy0: = Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x084!
[114504.027343] ath: = phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x006!
root@cerowrt:~# = dmesg | grep "checksum failed"
root@cerowrt:~# dmesg | tail = -5
[559339.007812] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to = join
[559342.328125] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to = join
[559344.812500] gw01: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to = join
[559344.847656] gw01: Creating new IBSS network, BSSID = 32:96:29:8f:34:d8
[559344.855468] IPv6: = ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): gw01: link becomes = ready
root@cerowrt:~#

On Jan 14, = 2014, at 7:51 AM, David Personette <dperson@gmail.com> = wrote:

I agree with Toke on this, cerowrt with a = single supported router was never about mass adoption. I think everyone = using it is in the self selected group of people that knew enough about = networking to find why their internet connection was *breaking* for = interactive use, then go out and buy a router that cost 2x-3x what other = similar specification consumer units cost. As far as I recall, initial = installation required TFTP. Not a real hurdle for many of us, but quite = a barrier to the normal consumer. I've been using it for my primary = router for over a year now, and have been very happy with it's stability = and reliability. I've had to roll back a few builds, but no real issues = otherwise. People that are here, are here to be where all the new = development of consumer level implementations of internet protocols and = things getting fixed is happening. My 2 cents.

--
David P.



On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:44 AM, = Toke H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen <toke@toke.dk>= wrote:
Christopher Robin <pheoni@gmail.com> writes:

> ***Are we here for research and development, or are we here for = final
> implementation?

I've always thought about CeroWRT as an R&D project. As Dave = points out
I don't think it's realistic to provide a "stable" release in the = sense
of having it upgraded and maintained. At least not as things stand = now.
However, designating a release as "stable" in the same way as the
previous one (i.e. something that won't crash and where most or all = of
the advertised features (mostly) work) would probably be a good = idea.
In particular, crash bugs and things that are completely broken = should
probably be fixed?


As far as my installation goes:

# cat /sys/kernel/debug/mips/unaligned_instructions
154737
# uptime
 10:39:18 up 5 days, 10:56,  load average: 0.05, 0.03, = 0.04
# dmesg | grep "TX DMA"
[348064.371093] ath: phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x004!
# dmesg | grep "checksum failed"
[13551.957031] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[16072.535156] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[22734.054687] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[93252.820312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[96253.570312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[106396.003906] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[156808.253906] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[163650.000000] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[224205.101562] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[269216.191406] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[276718.035156] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[316807.695312] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[329890.929687] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[333792.148437] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[399208.269531] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[410070.828125] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[435757.078125] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[441458.539062] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]
[449560.417968] ICMPv6 checksum failed = [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0001 > = 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002]


I've had to re-initialise the wifi a couple of times for no apparent
reason, and one or two reboots necessary, but nothing that major...

-Toke

_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bu= fferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel=


_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing = list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bu= fferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel<= br>

= --Apple-Mail=_D1B5991D-FA85-4D04-9805-953818EAFAE4--