Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 7401 Location: Little Rock
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 21:01 Post subject:
There is no distinct difference, the wzr-hp-ag300h and wzr-600dhp are exact same hardware, the only difference is the name change. If you scroll down to the wzr-600dhp and match it up to the wzr-hp-ag300h you'll see.
Joined: 04 Jan 2007 Posts: 11564 Location: Wherever the wind blows- North America
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 22:28 Post subject:
So far the only thing I've had trouble with is the occasional crash and reboot. I think it has to do with the NAS but not sure...I may disable it to see if that is the case....it could also have to do with the WDS/Connection watchdog set for an e3000 unit that is my main ftp server. They tend to loose connection once in awhile. For now I turned this watchdog off...I'll see if it still crashed/reboots. Its been doing it a couple times a day.
Other than this issue...its been running like a champ.
currently running a nightly 20709 build.
redhawk _________________ The only stupid question....is the unasked one.
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 7401 Location: Little Rock
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:15 Post subject:
@ redhawk0: Not that it solves that the builds aren't reporting the proper name for the unit... i noticed your reply to my comment within your ticket, and though i am not Brainslayer to give you reply, i am fairly sure that the wzr-hp-ag300h and wzr-600dhp are the same units, they share the same FCC ID: FDI-09101889-0 _________________ Wireless N Config | Linking Routers | DD-WRT Wiki | DD-WRT Builds | Peacock - Broadcom FAQ
Joined: 04 Jan 2007 Posts: 11564 Location: Wherever the wind blows- North America
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:19 Post subject:
Yeah...I figured that as well...just wanted to see what the big guys says since he wrote the buff version as well...I suspect its in the FW to set the DD_BOARD to the correct model number for the Buffalo Pro version...its really no big deal...just wanted it in the TRAC report.
redhawk _________________ The only stupid question....is the unasked one.
Joined: 04 Jan 2007 Posts: 11564 Location: Wherever the wind blows- North America
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:31 Post subject:
I do see something else that I can't put my finger on...I see Load Averages in the .75 up to 2.0 at times...but when I login to a ssh shell and do a top command nothing is showing excessive use...as a matter of fact...most times I see 0.6 as my top CPU hog on "http -p 80"
Anyone else seeing high Load averages with this unit?
redhawk _________________ The only stupid question....is the unasked one.
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 7401 Location: Little Rock
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:36 Post subject:
I been seeing load averages on all my Atheros units lately being high, since around build 19519, and i don't believe its anything directed at this specific unit, if you read into the build threads, it seems to affect all Atheros units.
And i mean high averages (.80 to 2.20 is highest i seen so far) when i am not even doing anything but accessing the webgui, no other traffic whatsoever. Kinda odd, but hopefully something they are working out. _________________ Wireless N Config | Linking Routers | DD-WRT Wiki | DD-WRT Builds | Peacock - Broadcom FAQ
Joined: 04 Jan 2007 Posts: 11564 Location: Wherever the wind blows- North America
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:40 Post subject:
I just saw it...its showing 97% CPU usage for the NIC...looks like they gotta work out the control of the internal NIC a little better....I can't go back too far in builds...but can you test your older build 19519 and see if NIC shows the high percentage.
redhawk _________________ The only stupid question....is the unasked one.
Joined: 04 Jan 2007 Posts: 11564 Location: Wherever the wind blows- North America
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2013 19:26 Post subject:
One other thing to report...I mentioned that I had this random crash and reboot issue....it seems to only happen when the 5GHz band is used...I changed channels from 104 to 36. I think it's more stable now....I'll keep monitoring.
redhawk _________________ The only stupid question....is the unasked one.
I just saw it...its showing 97% CPU usage for the NIC...looks like they gotta work out the control of the internal NIC a little better....I can't go back too far in builds...but can you test your older build 19519 and see if NIC shows the high percentage.
redhawk
No, it is showing 97% for idle.. _________________ Kernel panic: Aiee, killing interrupt handler!
Just to clarify it seems like you have this one working?
I have been looking at to get into DD-WRT for about 3 years now and every couple months go through a bunch of posts looking for the "right" router but since there really isn't one I never puled the trigger and got into here as my router had been working well enough and my wife didn't want me getting anything that would mess up a bunch. Now our old router is losing wireless connection multiple times daily for 10-30 seconds so now I think is the time to get a new one and I was looking at this one. A bunch of other threads didn't seem to hopeful but this one is the newest and seems to indicate some success.
I have the Buffalo WZR-HP-AG300H has you all say its the same unit and I also have high loads even when nothing special is happening
All builds that I tried after 20119 I have high loads, now I am using the build 20675 and it seems pretty stable for me despite the loads. _________________ Buffalo WZR-HP-AG300H | TPLINK ARCHER-C7 v2