Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Linux-ATM-General] br2684 problem
|
From: chas w. - C. <ch...@cm...> - 2007-04-19 15:49:07
|
In message <462...@gm...>,Radu writes: >>>> RFC1483/2684 bridge: Could not configure interface:Invalid argument >> ... >>>> br2684_create: register_netdev failed > >I've modified br2684.c kernel file to get more debug messages. Now dmesg >says something like: > >root@OpenWrt:/# dmesg | tail >usb 1-2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 7 >usb 1-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice >usb 1-2: reset full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 7 >speedtch 1-2:1.0: found stage 1 firmware speedtch-1.bin >speedtch 1-2:1.0: found stage 2 firmware speedtch-2.bin >ATM dev 0: ADSL line is synchronising >ATM dev 0: ADSL line is up (2560 kb/s down | 512 kb/s up) >br2684: br2684_create >br2684: registered netdev nas0 >br2684: br2684_get_stats the previous message said 'register_netdev failed' and the new messages from the debugging version you built says 'registered netdev nas0' (the debug message always says this, it should say 'trying to register...') and doesnt say 'register_netdev failed'. so it looks like its no longer failing to register nas0. >root@OpenWrt:/# ip link show >1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,10000> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue > link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 >2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,10000> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:1a:92:7e:6a:9b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop qlen 1000 > link/ether 40:10:18:00:00:2d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >4: eth0.0@eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,10000> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue > link/ether 00:1a:92:7e:6a:9b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >5: br-lan: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,10000> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue > link/ether 00:1a:92:7e:6a:9b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >6: eth0.1@eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,10000> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue > link/ether 00:1a:92:7e:6a:9b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >10: nas0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff since nas0 is now in the list of network interfaces, it must certainly be registered and working. what makes you think it wasnt working in this case? |