It's just a bog standard lantiq VRX268 SOC (just with a weird way to attach the wireless), so absolutely not. It will just barely achieve 85 MBit/s without SQM - and just over 110 MBit/s with software flow-offloading enabled (both figures assuming that SMP is enabled, otherwise you'd drop to 55-60 MBit/s).
There are two patches (or actually a reimplementation of the xrx200 legacy driver) out there: How to make the lantiq xrx200 faster, which I have also tested but not benchmarked. Apart from that, I have only done one performance test and that was to check, if the box running two OpenWrt instances would for wifi clients be fast enough to fully use my 80MBit VDSL and it did. I have not checked the switch performance on the Lantiq SoC in any way.
OK, so performance-wise, this has no advantages over a BT HomeHub 5A. Thanks for the info!
In terms of performance, vrx268 and vrx288 are identical - and yes, performance should be roughly on par with the bthub5 (the wireless offloading might help a little, but only minimally).
@slh And the patches mentioned here: How can we make the lantiq xrx200 devices faster
Fixing dma and smp, is there any improvement to expect compared to openwrt trunk?
Yes, but don't expect a world of a difference it's more a matter of little by little.
1 Like
Probably true in router mode, I had an BT HH5A running under OpenWrt, but essentially as bridged modem, and I could saturate my 100/32 link bidirectionally, but all the HH55 did was handling the dsl modem and the ethernet bridge, no NAT, no PPPoE no firewalling and no WiFi...
(that was with 19.07.4, IIRC, switched modes since then, but since my link got more stable due to wiring changes in my apartment, I am tempted to try the HH5A again).
With software flow-offloading enabled the bthub5 can (just barely) deal with a 100/40 MBit/s link, no headroom left (under load), but it does the job - pretty well.
--
Currently only using it as PPPoE router for VDSL2+vectoring, not the modem, due to cabling circumstances - and given that this will only have to work a few more months this way (wouldn't make sense to buy a long enough rj45 <--> rj11 cable for the remaining time).
Is there a snapshot to test of the "pr pending"? Which PR is referred to?
@Catfriend1 There is a fork based on the PR mentioned in the Wiki and based on work of others. See posts 63ff.
USB is now working. Found a forgotten flag in older kernel sources. Setting that flag makes the renesas xhci driver work without more changes.
Please note, when the current build configuration of my fork is used and usb-storage and vfat file system modules are added, the image already becomes too large for initramfs boot (if it also contains the wasp/ath79 basic image). So if one wants to test, I suggest to either remove copying the wasp/ath79 image (result is no wireless but USB can now used for the wasp image - placing it in /opt/wasp and starting upload-wasp.sh manually) or remove the copying of the dsl firmware (result is no vdsl connection). The copying is done in the wasp_uploader makefile: package/utils/wasp_uploader/Makefile and transfer additional files to the fritzbox using scp after ramboot.
Another hint for testing, if the scripts/flashing/eva_ramboot.py script does not finish or appears to be hanging and not timing out while uploading, then the initramfs image is too big.
Same is true for the wasp image, if the ps command on lantiq openwrt is still running wasp_uploader_stage2, then the upload likely did not work. One could use killall wasp_uploader_stage2 to get rid of it (needs to run 5 times, because the script has a loop) and then run /opt/wasp/upload-wasp.sh manually to see if it hangs or an error message.
1 Like
Switched my fork (see previous posts) to the dsa switch driver and kernel 5.10.
3 Likes
So far I am trying to see if there is evidence of NAND without hw-ecc for this device.
The mentioned Macronix chips are actually misdiagnosed Micron chips with hw ecc.
See Openwrt Wiki 7490
The potential Macronix chips of 512 MiB used in some other AVM devices also have on chip ecc support...
So if you have a 7490 with different NAND flash than MT29F4G08ABADAWP please mention this here...
FYI: The code from this pull request has finally been merged into openwrt:main: see:
Comment this comment on the above mentioned PR 5075: [lantiq: add support for AVM Fritzbox 3490, 5490 and 7490]
4 Likes
Hi! I wonder what is the current status of this? The wiki still says there is no support, and I am not sure how to interpret the last few commits in the PR. I was looking into this as I am trying to get a second-hand DSL modem/router I can run OpenWRT on.
Hi!
If you haven't bought it yet, I would not recommend the 7490.
The SOC is quite dated and the system design is weird.
The 7490 seems to be supported in the Snapshot version, no release version yet.
If you are in Germany, many people are selling the 7520 really cheap.
Which has the same hardware as the (more expensive) 7530:
https://openwrt.org/toh/avm/avm_fritz_box_7530
The 7520/7530 has a much newer, more powerful SOC, which should be enough to handle a DSL connection quite well.
2 Likes
Please note the vrx318 models like the 7520 work well with VDSL2 but I have seen no success report for ADSL, so make sure that VDSL2 is used. Also by now there are unfortunately multiple models sold under the 7520 name and only some will work with OpenWrt.
4 Likes