GNUmoon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
tidalf has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
tidalf has joined #openwrt-devel
tidalf has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
tidalf has joined #openwrt-devel
goliath has joined #openwrt-devel
dgcampea has joined #openwrt-devel
robimarko has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
jow: we've had the same issues with the wolfSSL and it took us some time to iron them out, IMO we're now facing the same situation after mbedTLS switch
<ynezz>
hm, maybe Chrome is being more picky and just preventing TLS protocol downgrading attacks, so if you're running 22.03 and used TLS 1.3 (which is the case), then it would refuse to allow TLS 1.2 in 23.05?
<ynezz>
maybe it's some bug in that self-signed certificate handling? The one generated with px5g-wolfssl in 22.03 might be unusable with px5g-mbedtls in 23.05?
<enyc>
... shortly to rebuild config on a lantix xrx200 HHv5a, I guess the xrx200 switch driver problem not sorted yet, release notes talk about fix hoped for release...?
<enyc>
just asking on the offchance I can usefully help test
<Dseven>
enyc: I don't know if anyone is working on that. The target has been switched to source-only, so I don't think there's any pressure to get that issue addressed now. https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/12515
bluew has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
PaulFertser has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<enyc>
Dseven: I noted in praticular the release notes for 23.05.0-rc1 sayquite clearly "Known issues"
<enyc>
lantiq/xrx200 target is not build because the DSA driver still shows some error messages. Fix is planned before the final OpenWrt 23.05 release.
<enyc>
Dseven: and also I understood tauke was going to take a look when time-permitting. I also understood (discussed here before) it was agreed that xrx200 devices areaquite popular/useful as vdsl-enabled openwrt.
<enyc>
Dseven: therefore, it was reasonable to ask here r.e. help test if change been figured.
<Habbie>
(thanks, whoever hit approve)
<Dseven>
enyc: sorry if I implied that your query was invalid - that was not my intent, rather stating the situation as I see it. I hope you can find someone willing to spend time on it, but AFAIK no one. Would be glad to hear otherwise!
schwicht has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
danitool has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rsalvaterra has joined #openwrt-devel
bookworm has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
rua has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
bookworm has joined #openwrt-devel
<enyc>
Dseven: somebody put that comment in the release-notes =))
goliath has quit [Quit: SIGSEGV]
FLD has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
FLD has joined #openwrt-devel
<enyc>
Hrrm, why does the default config built on lantiq/xrx200 BT-HHv5a on 22.03 OpenWRT, embed the MAC addresses into the /etc/config/network/ file? does this for lan0 lan1 lan2 lan3 dsl0 .....
<enyc>
I really would like the config to be 'portable' to other HHv5a -- (without ''cloning'' the mac address)
schwicht has joined #openwrt-devel
goliath has joined #openwrt-devel
PaulFertser has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
PaulFertser has joined #openwrt-devel
dohseven has joined #openwrt-devel
<dohseven>
Hi, I would like to propose a patch for opkg-lede, but I see that the repo on GitHub is quite dead, with two open PRs and no responses
<dohseven>
Should I rather send the patch to the OpenWrt development mailing list?
<PaulFertser>
dohseven: how is the binary called on current OpenWrt version?
<soxrok2212>
csharper2005: really? ive had several people report its completely broken in 23.05 for them. i have an xdr-8086 and redmi ax6000. both worked perfectly on 22.03, neither work on 23.05
<djfe>
PaulFertser: thx for correcting me on the opkg-lede mirror
<PaulFertser>
djfe: actually, I was late, you pasted the official URL before me :)
<djfe>
haha, no I meant the issues
<djfe>
where you said PRs against the mirror are fine
<djfe>
regardless patches to the mailing list will be noticed
<djfe>
soxrok2212: Do you mean your device is an XDR-6086?
<djfe>
openwrt-22.03 never supported the XDR-6086 https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=commit;h=21be2c26d555b33e9faf85be3e980876810b29d3
<djfe>
same goes for the redmi ax6000
<soxrok2212>
6086 - oops, yep
<soxrok2212>
snapshots worked perfectly
<csharper2005>
soxrok2212: yes. various devices with mt7602/7615/7603 (ac). To be honest it was a master branch near the 23.05. And I have not tested yet 802.11s on my Mercusys mr90x (new ax wireless).
<Ansuel>
do you have the specific hash where the thing worked?
<djfe>
ok so meshing for the new mediatek hw was broken in the last 1-2 months (mt798x)
<Ansuel>
might be 3 cause. 1. mt driver bump 2. backport of wifi fixup due to security vulnerabilities 3. a change in openwrt
<soxrok2212>
its been reported on e8450 too (mt7621)
<djfe>
*mt7622
<Ansuel>
are we sure the mt driver wasn't bumped between a working hash and today ?
<soxrok2212>
mt7622, yep wow. bad day
<PaulFertser>
Does poor performance affect both bands?
<djfe>
thx for reporting soxrok2212, don't worry ^^
<soxrok2212>
WAX202 affected too
<djfe>
ok that would be mt7621
<PaulFertser>
mt7622 is used for 802.11n on 2.4 GHz while mt7915 is used for 5 GHz, both are mt76 based though (on rt3200).
<djfe>
mt7915 is the wifi chip (DBDC so it should server 2.4 and 5GHz if I'm not mistaken), mt7622 is the (arm) cpu
<djfe>
*serve
<PaulFertser>
djfe: no, on rt3200 non-DBDC version is used.
<soxrok2212>
^
<djfe>
learned something new, huh
<djfe>
thx
<soxrok2212>
Ansuel: i don't have a specific hash, i stupidly nuked my build host to rule it out as an issue
<PaulFertser>
djfe: that's why it doesn't support 802.11ax on 2.4 GHz btw.
<djfe>
I guess, we need to run git bisect
<Ansuel>
if everything was in snapshot i think the only way is to produce some testing image with some very old hash
<Ansuel>
problem is to understand how much to go back
<soxrok2212>
i would guess my last good build was ~early may
<djfe>
it probably makes the most sense to test the mt76 update first
<djfe>
(test run the commit before that and the commit itself)
<Ansuel>
then i would ask to test with an end april patch if we want to take this approach
<djfe>
or that
<Ansuel>
for sure some efforts are needed
<soxrok2212>
ill make a build from late april and try it later
<csharper2005>
soxrok2212: What means "poor" performance for you?