Hello Saverio,
Yeah, I just deleted that code, which was preventing my port 5 from being set
as tagged on previous VLANs and removed it completely from those VLANs if it
was marked as tagged later.
I think that the problem is that the code that I removed is sequential and it
only removes tagged ports configured before the untagged appearence, because
Domantas config has the untagged appearence port first and the tagged later,
whereas mine has the tagged first and the untagged later.
And my config:
---
config interface 'loopback'
option ifname 'lo'
option proto 'static'
option ipaddr '127.0.0.1'
option netmask '255.0.0.0'
config globals 'globals'
option ula_prefix 'fd0c:518e:715b::/48'
config switch
option name 'switch0'
option reset '1'
option enable_vlan '1'
config switch_vlan
option device 'switch0'
option vlan '1'
option vid '1'
option ports '0t 3 4 5t'
config switch_vlan
option device 'switch0'
option vlan '2'
option ports '0t 1t'
option vid '2'
config switch_vlan
option device 'switch0'
option vlan '3'
option ports '0t 1t'
option vid '3'
config switch_vlan
option device 'switch0'
option vlan '4'
option vid '4'
option ports '0t 2 5'
config interface 'lan'
option ifname 'eth0.1'
option type 'bridge'
option proto 'static'
option ipaddr '192.168.1.1'
option netmask '255.255.255.0'
option ip6assign '60'
option igmp_snooping '1'
config interface 'iptv'
option ifname 'eth0.2'
option proto 'static'
option ipaddr '172.26.208.63'
option netmask '255.255.240.0'
option gateway '10.26.208.1'
option defaultroute '0'
option peerdns '0'
config interface 'voip'
option ifname 'eth0.3'
option proto 'dhcp'
option defaultroute '0'
option peerdns '0'
config interface 'wan'
option ifname 'eth0.6'
option proto 'pppoe'
option username 'adslppp@telefonicanetpa'
option password 'adslppp'
config switch_vlan
option device 'switch0'
option vlan '6'
option ports '0t 1t'
option vid '6'
config interface 'tvlan'
option proto 'static'
option ifname 'eth0.4'
option ipaddr '10.217.47.233'
option netmask '255.255.255.248'
---
Regards,
Álvaro.
El 02/05/2014 9:46, Saverio Proto escribió:
> Hello Alvaro,
>
> I have another user (Cc: in this email) reporting wdr4300 working with
> the original patch.
>
> I updated my tree with your changes, and rebased on current trunk:
> https://github.com/zioproto/openwrt-trunk-zioproto/commits/ticket12181
>
> You are just deleting this code right ?
> https://github.com/zioproto/openwrt-trunk-zioproto/commit/c4a8e0a8f164d03074d55e649e883422ae03c905
>
> Alvaro and Domantas MrVisata, can you please tell me your testing
> setup? I would like to understand what is working for Domantas and
> what is not working for Alvaro.
>
> If you just post your /etc/config/network it would be enough. Thanks.
>
> Saverio
>
> 2014-05-02 3:07 GMT+02:00 Álvaro Fernández Rojas <nolt...@gmail.com>:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've tested this patch but I couldn't get it completely fixed on AR8327
>> (TL-WDR4300).
>>
>> However, I've modified it and successfully configured the switch for
>> untagged + tagged.
>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4708147/openwrt/patches/ar8327.patch
>>
>> The problem was in ar8327_sw_set_ports(), which I suspect was copied from
>> ar8216_sw_set_ports(), without removing the code that disables all tagged
>> ports if an untagged port is already present.
>>
>> P.S: @Saverio feel free to resend the patch yourself if you agree with the
>> changes.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Álvaro.
>>
>> El 24/04/2014 12:56, Saverio Proto escribió:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> the patch is attached to this email.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>> Saverio
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-04-24 12:47 GMT+02:00 John Crispin <j...@phrozen.org>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 24/04/2014 12:44, Saverio Proto wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> talking about: https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/12181
>>>>>
>>>>> patch has been tested @ Ninux.org on TP-Link WDR3600. We are now
>>>>> able to successfully have tagged and untagged frames together on
>>>>> the same port.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the clean version of the patch rebased on current trunk:
>>>>> https://github.com/zioproto/openwrt-trunk-zioproto/commit/e7226ba45d7198dff71fde3caa1be9962f9f4ef1
>>>>>
>>>>> please review it and merge it into trunk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Saverio
>>>>
>>>> hi Saverio,
>>>>
>>>> can you send the cleaned up version to the -devel list ? that way its
>>>> inside out patchwork and we can mark the old version superseeded
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>>> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
>>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>>> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
>>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
