ASUS RT-AC88U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.382.15850

[skypx]

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

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?

 

[fax]

Update to this firmware and all seems to work OK apart been also pestered in the logs by kernel and dhd messages:

Aug 29 22:19:20 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create: Send Flow Create Req flow ID 262 for peer b8:08:d7:c3:ae:f5 prio 0 ifindex 0
Aug 29 22:19:20 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create_response_process: Flow Create Response status = 0 Flow 262
Aug 29 22:19:20 kernel: CONSOLE: 027030.494 flow_create : bitmap_size=512  maxitems=512
Aug 29 22:19:21 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create: Send Flow Create Req flow ID 261 for peer b8:08:d7:c3:ae:f5 prio 1 ifindex 0
Aug 29 22:19:21 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create_response_process: Flow Create Response status = 0 Flow 261
Aug 29 22:19:21 kernel: CONSOLE: 027031.074 flow_create : bitmap_size=512  maxitems=512
Aug 29 22:19:21 kernel: CONSOLE: 027031.083 wl1.0: wlc_send_bar: seq 0x1 tid 1
Aug 29 22:19:41 kernel: CONSOLE: 027051.922 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:19:45 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create: Send Flow Create Req flow ID 260 for peer 28:6a:ba:22:e9:be prio 0 ifindex 0
Aug 29 22:19:45 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create_response_process: Flow Create Response status = 0 Flow 260
Aug 29 22:19:45 kernel: CONSOLE: 027055.382 flow_create : bitmap_size=512  maxitems=512
Aug 29 22:19:45 kernel: CONSOLE: 027055.390 wl1.0: wlc_send_bar: seq 0x1 tid 0
Aug 29 22:19:46 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create: Send Flow Create Req flow ID 259 for peer 28:6a:ba:22:e9:be prio 1 ifindex 0
Aug 29 22:19:46 kernel: dhd_prot_flow_ring_create_response_process: Flow Create Response status = 0 Flow 259
Aug 29 22:19:46 kernel: CONSOLE: 027056.556 flow_create : bitmap_size=512  maxitems=512
Aug 29 22:19:46 kernel: CONSOLE: 027056.760 wl1.0: wlc_send_bar: seq 0x1 tid 1
Aug 29 22:20:11 kernel: CONSOLE: 027081.863 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:20:20 kernel: CONSOLE: 027090.744 wl1.0: wlc_send_bar: seq 0x4d tid 0
Aug 29 22:20:31 kernel: CONSOLE: 027101.867 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:20:51 kernel: CONSOLE: 027121.822 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:21:11 kernel: CONSOLE: 027141.790 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:21:41 kernel: CONSOLE: 027171.572 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:22:01 kernel: CONSOLE: 027191.602 wl0: wlc_ampdu_rx_recv_delba: AMPDU OFF: tid 0 initiator 1 reason 39
Aug 29 22:22:16 kernel: dhd_wait_pend8021x: TIMEOUT

I don't see any adverse effects, so far... no idea what they mean.

 

[RMerlin]

I don't see any adverse effects, so far... no idea what they mean.

Seems like it was compiled with debugging logging still enabled.

oh right, thanks, i was sure it used to say something different

In 380.67, I was simply not showing either columns at all for the RT-AC88U. I decided in 380.68 to re-add them, so at least the info available for the BCM ports can be shown. I just can't find a good wording to make it clear that these fields are not supported by the Realtek switch. Maybe I could try "not supported", provided it's not too large to fit in there...

 

[DragonSpyre]

Has anyone had any contact from Asus regarding what's happening with the RT AC-3100 as of yet?

 

[fax]

Seems like it was compiled with debugging logging still enabled.

thanks!

 

[Dr Tone]

1) I notice it says it is continually checking of my internet connection status even though it grabbed an IP Address and everything is working.
2) Port forwarding seems finicky still, non of my port forwards were working properly until I rebooted the router.
3) When enabling Adaptive QOS it said it was going to disable DUAL WAN aggregation and enable fail over instead and turn off NAT Acceleration. I checked after and NAT acceleration was disabled, don't use DUAL WAN. But upon reboot NAT acceleration says it's auto again. Not sure if it's working.

 

[jim769]

Has anyone had any contact from Asus regarding what's happening with the RT AC-3100 as of yet?

Just tried again and for the 3100 the firmware is still completely borked makes a brick every time. My buddy called me this afternoon at work he updated his 3100 and yep its bricked. Kinda hard to believe at this point the firmware has not been pulled. I would bet by now Asus has bricked many routers and 99 % of them have no idea how to recover from it. Sad indeed.

 

[Shonk]

Seems like it was compiled with debugging logging still enabled.



In 380.67, I was simply not showing either columns at all for the RT-AC88U. I decided in 380.68 to re-add them, so at least the info available for the BCM ports can be shown. I just can't find a good wording to make it clear that these fields are not supported by the Realtek switch. Maybe I could try "not supported", provided it's not too large to fit in there...

I forgot to put the xbox one back to the Broadcom switch and its showing the link speed today on the realtek..
though its not showing duplex is this normal?

With regards to vlan id if you cant pull the info maybe remove it altogether?
and maybe N/A for device?

just out of curiosity without having to look too hard do you know how the Realtek is linked to the Broadcom and its bandwidth to it

 

[jim769]

At this point this thread is about the new firmware NOT a conversation of your small issues. You should start another thread.

 

[BatJoe]

At this point this thread is about the new firmware NOT a conversation of your small issues. You should start another thread.

That is an absurd comment. This firmware is not working right for all users, so it should be reported, even if it is not about the router not booting after updating. All issues are relevant.

As for the AC3100, I would just suggest everyone hound ASUS support. I've spoken to them on the phone, and via Facebook. I would assume Merlin has contacts there that he could report this too as well?

In any case, they will eventually find out as more people will push that update button in the control panel and be calling them.

 

[RMerlin]

though its not showing duplex is this normal?

Yes. The amount of info I can grab from the Realtek switch (without having access to the proprietary SDK) is the link state and it's rate, and that's it.

just out of curiosity without having to look too hard do you know how the Realtek is linked to the Broadcom and its bandwidth to it

RGMII AFAIK.


He's right however, this is completely off-topic for this thread.

 

[BatJoe]

FYI, AC3100 users, ASUS has released a new version of the firmware today.

https://www.asus.com/us/Networking/RT-AC3100/HelpDesk_Download/

 

[jim769]

FYI, AC3100 users, ASUS has released a new version of the firmware today.

https://www.asus.com/us/Networking/RT-AC3100/HelpDesk_Download/

Good news has anyone tried it yet ??

 

[CorruptedMind]

Good news has anyone tried it yet ??

It's working now

 

[Strongbad]

I can confirm that The Asus firmware 3.0.0.4_382_15850-g7402e99 released 8-31-17 works on my Asus AC3100 router. Also, it appears they have pulled the August 29th "Brick-Maker" firmware from their downloads. Hope this helps

 

[DragonSpyre]

I can confirm that The Asus firmware 3.0.0.4_382_15850-g7402e99 released 8-31-17 works on my Asus AC3100 router. Also, it appears they have pulled the August 29th "Brick-Maker" firmware from their downloads. Hope this helps

Yep just flashed the new build on my RT AC-3100 as well, seems to be running smoothly so far. I guess we made enough noise that Asus heard us

 

[sm00thpapa]

For the RT-AC88U it still shows the 29 Aug 2017 firmware. Guess they haven't updated the site yet. Typical Asus.

 

[fax]

As AC88U did not experienced the problem they are unlikely going to replace it.

 

[sm00thpapa]

So has anyone loaded this on the AC88U without issues? I heard both routers had issues with it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[jim769]

Just loaded it on my 3100 no issues but it's only been 15 minutes or so. So far it appears to be working ok.
EDIT:
What i am seeing is the sys log just slamming full of meaningless logs. Never saw this with other firmware. I would post logs but dont feel like editing out any mac addresses and such. This firmware is a log spammer for sure. I will ignore it as nothing here has changed so i know its not important. Sure would make it hard to sift through the junk if there was something amiss. O well always something.