What's new

ASUS RT-AC88U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.382.15850

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

I install new firmware 382.1_2 and speed drop to 320 Mbps (with 382.1 was 150 Mbs). I stop all AiProtection and QOS and speed was not modify. I put back 380.67 and speed go to 856 Mbps. With 380.68 all versions I have different problems.
Rez. Firm 382.1_2.jpg Rez. Firm 380.67.jpg
 
[QUOTE =“Gregory Phillips,發表:360625,成員:52704”]到目前為止,我沒有任何與此固件3.0.0.4.382_18991吞吐速度有關的問題,不像以前的版本,這迫使我強行循環清除。[/引用]


It takes a long time, but after a day there will be problems
It took a couple of days but it happened to me just as you predicted so I rolled back to 15850 and might even go down one more firmware.

Edit: I just dropped back to 380.7743. Do you guys think that the web browser has any influence over how a firmware is installed?
 
Last edited:
Hello everybody,

I have the same problem with latest Merlin firmware 382.1_2. The download speed is 380 Mbps and upload is 500 Mbps.
With the official Asus firmware 3.0.0.4.382.x is even worst ~30Mbps Download and 500Mbps Upload.
With 380.68_4 Merlin firmware the download speed is 935 Mbps and upload is 515 Mbps.
 
Last edited:
I've pretty much narrowed it down to dual wan as the source of my issues with 380.15850 and 382.18991. Once I disabled it the wan error messages and disconnects ceased with 18991 working without issue right now as long as I keep dual wan off.
 
Wow! What a range of possible causes for very similar issues!
All I know is mine is stable at the moment so I'm very reluctant to make any changes.

I'm very impressed with the feedback and support on the forum. Cheers guys!
 
I get the same after update to 382.1_2 firmware. Looks like an ASUS bug carried over as it happens in Asus and Merlin version? I have also posted in that firmware thread the other day.

dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0

Any resolution for this, does it do any harm, use resources??

I upgraded an AC88U to 382.15850 and the log lists a lot of these entries

Code:
Aug 30 09:46:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:46:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:47:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:48:13 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:49:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:50:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:50:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:50:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0
Aug 30 09:50:12 kernel: dhd_flow_rings_delete_for_peer: ifindex 0

Any idea why?
 
I believe this is just syslog spam because Asus left the log in debugging mode. I don't think it's anything to worry about.
 

Similar threads

Support SNBForums w/ Amazon

If you'd like to support SNBForums, just use this link and buy anything on Amazon. Thanks!

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top