TP-link TL-SG2424P

Hi there,

I have just a short question, is it at all possible to get openwrt running on a TP-link TL-SG2424P?
I have seen that the TL-SG2452P is supported
Am I completely mistaken to assume that the TL-SG2424P has very similar hardware and therefore has a shot?
Thank you all!

It cannot be assumed, no. In fact, there are multiple revisions of the T1600G-28PS/TL-SG2424P which may have significantly different internal hardware based in part by looking at the vendor firmware versions that are available. I personally have a T1600G-28PS v2 device, but I've never had the opportunity to open it up to see what chips it uses (SoC/CPU, memory, flash, etc.).

If you have the ability and inclination, you can take a look inside your device (be sure to note which version you've got) and document the chips you see.

EDIT: @slh and I had an offline conversation about this... with permission, I'm merging that into this thread since it may be of interest to the OP and/or others.


I personally have a T1600G-28PS v2 device, but I've never had the opportunity to open it up to see what chips it uses (SoC/CPU, memory, flash, etc.)'

Strongly suggests a cortex A9 based Broadcom (Hurricane 2/ iProc, BCM53342) SOC, using a v3.6.5 based linux kernel. While there is some mainline linux support for this SOC, there is none for OpenWrt - so (depending on flash/ RAM sizes, which are harder to find out quickly) potentially supportable, but quite a massive undertaking (and not that likely to happen).

1 Like


I had downloaded the GPL code, too, in an effort to take a quick peek. But, the chromebook I'm using right now doesn't have anything setup to handle tar.gz files, so I gave up for now... lol.

Like the OP, I'd love to see this device supported, but the vendor firmware is good enough (and in my case, I'm not actively using that switch right now anyway -- replaced it a year or so ago, and it's just sitting on my shelf -- nice switch, but the upgraded device is much nicer).

Btw. RAM seems to be 256 MB, I haven't found any binary firmware updates yet, so I can only speculate about the flash size - but NAND looks not too unlikely (so large enough).

…and based on (which seems to apply to v2 hardware as well), more than 8 MB flash (8,9M T1600G-28PSv3_en_3.0.5_[20200110-rel50207]_up.bin).

1 Like

The v2 hardware presumably cannot use the v3 firmware upgrade (I recall that I had directly asked TP-Link about this at one point, and they said the firmware versions were not compatible across hardware revisions; I'd love the more modern interface of the v3 devices with their updated firmware). The v2 has never had a firmware upgrade... presumably they never found any serious bugs during the time that it was actively supported. But hopefully you're right about the flash memory in the v2's.

That said, given that the SoC isn't actively supported in OpenWrt, it almost certainly would be a massive undertaking to add it, and I'm certainly not the right person to do that (knowledge + time/energy)

Information about the flash is still guesswork (the defconfigs in the GPL source cover all bases), 256 MB RAM is pretty much confirmed though (10 MB reserved, 240 MB usable to linux, based on the kernel config) - 8 MB flash (or smaller) would be kind of out of line for that much RAM (nothing it impossible though, it's Broadcom and TP-Link after all).

Both Marvell and Broadcom switches could be supported by OpenWrt, it's more or less a happy accident that we got support for Realtek switches after all, but it would need quite considerable development (but there seems to be 'more' mainline support than for Realtek, however I didn't dive deep enough into the code to check for missing sources or binary-only objects, the switch support seems to be based around robocfg, so a blast from the past (wrt54 era...)). Personally I wouldn't want to tackle that porting either, as it's going to be a steep learning curve, but it appears to be possible.

1 Like

I will check the hardware tomorrow as i am on my night shift right now. I would love openwrt on this as I would love to have it do 3 things:
Dhcp Server
Adguard Home
VPN Gateway for selected devices.

I would, too... but it would likely be quite a lot of effort to bring support for the platform to OpenWrt. It's possible, though.

This wouldn't be an issue, but I'd recommend just using your router or a PiHole or similar.

This would likely be a bad experience -- the switch may not have the performance characteristics to pull this off, but it does depend on the details of the SoC/CPU.

This would be much more demanding than the AGH loads due to the encryption. Again, it depends on the details of the processor. For reference, this device is actually an L2+ switch with the vendor firmware... this means that it can actually do some basic routing, but probably not at the highest performance standards. For regular L2 managed switches, standard (non-VPN) routing on a switch, the routing bandwidth typically caps out between 20-50Mbps -- pretty slow. The switch we're talking about would probably do better for standard routing throughput, but I'm not sure how good it would be, nor is it clear how it would do with VPN. Certainly would be fun to test, but temper your expectations.

A standard router would likely be a better option for your current goals if for no other reason than it would be possible now (as compared to an unknown path and time to potentially make it supported by OpenWrt).

ahh thank you for that clearification. I have Adguard with it's dhcp on a raspberry pi4 now...
I know this is way off topic and I am sorry for that, could i just use the raspberry pi for that? I have a fritzbox 7590 setup and i would like to keep a lot of it's features (dect, internetconnection mesh etc) I just want to use openwrt for the formentioned features. Is that feasable/wise?

The Pi4 is a good platform for what you're doing, regardless if you're using OpenWrt or the RaspberryPi OS (or other linux).

While that page is written with realtek rtl838x switches in mind, the general situation will be very similar for broadcom based ones as well (if e.g. BCM4709A0 is roughly comparable on the CPU performance side of things).

Expect to invest a double figure amount of months (at least, if you are a seasoned developer) necessary for the development needed - or 15-60 bucks for an already supported (second hand) rtl838x based switch.