Is there a guide to understand the output of System log ?
My router has lost wan connection a couple of times in the last few months and I'd like to be able to recognise any useful information in the log as to the cause of that.
So for example, these messages were logged:
daemon.info dnsmasq[630]: exiting on receipt of SIGTERM
daemon.info dnsmasq[2998]: started, version 2.80 cachesize 150
daemon.info dnsmasq[2998]: DNS service limited to local subnets
Which probably explains the loss of wan connection.
It was preceeded a few seconds earlier by this message:
kern.warn kernel: [ 60.629778] ath10k_pci 0001:01:00.0: Invalid peer id 1 or peer stats buffer, peer: dc63c000 sta: (null)
But I don't know the meaning, significance or severity of this warning.
Also this was logged:
daemon.err uhttpd[814]: luci: accepted login on / for root from 192.168.4.242
Which was me logging in to find out what was wrong, so I don't see why it is designated as an error.
I understand the System Log is not intended to give a detailed and verbose problem analysis, but it ought to be possible to interpret what the key messages mean.
So what I'm hoping for is a guide that helps me understand the meaning, significance and severity of key messages that are logged.
(If you disagree that it should be logged an "Error", you may want to inquire with the developers as to why they chose to use the severity "Error" instead of another.)
Maybe you're not following the thread. You never answered me.
Are you sure you didn't call it an error (your first post surely says that)?
(I'm staring to think you're both posters...or you forgot your first post...or this is to play a "gotcha game"?)
And I provided 3 links...were they helpful and relevant?
Also, I don't see anywhere I was impolite.
Is there a reason you're trying to portray me as unhelpful, irrelevant and impolite...when I provided 3 links that seem relevant to your question; and you in fact said "error"?
Or maybe you didn't realize/re-read that I responded to someone else too?
@IPA, my apologies if you thought I was being rude by mixing relevant answers/responses with those to @faser; and for the confusion it seemed to have caused.