#3732 HIGH 9.1.0: arp broadcasts don't wake up autosuspended laptop

[Zarro Boogs per Child]

#3732: arp broadcasts don't wake up autosuspended laptop
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
           Reporter:  wad                  |       Owner:  cjb        
               Type:  defect               |      Status:  new        
           Priority:  high                 |   Milestone:  9.1.0      
          Component:  power manager (OHM)  |     Version:             
         Resolution:                       |    Keywords:  cjbfor9.1.0
        Next_action:  code                 |    Verified:  0          
Deployment_affected:                       |   Blockedby:  6993       
           Blocking:                       |  
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Changes (by ashish):

 * cc: ashish (added)


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:38 carrano]:
 > Repeated tests reported in [http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/3732#comment:36
 the above comment] but this time with firmware release 22.p23. (btw there
 is a consistent typo in this comment: the iwpriv commands are
 {set,get,reset}_wol_rule, not {set,get,reset}_wol_filter)
 >
 > The results were not good either. Now the && (AND) operator seems
 completely broken.
 >
 > When the host receives an arp for its IP addr (192.168.11.14) it will
 wake up if configured with the following filters:
 >
 > {{{
 > iwpriv eth0 set_wol_filter "b 00000806 at 4"
 > }}}
 > or
 > {{{
 > iwpriv eth0 set_wol_filter "b 0ca80b0e at 20"
 > }}}
 >
 > But will '''not''' wake up for:
 > {{{
 > iwpriv eth0 set_wol_filter "b 00000806 at 4 && 0ca80b0e at 20"
 > }}}
 > or
 > {{{
 > iwpriv eth0 set_wol_filter "b 0ca80b0e at 20 && 00000806 at 4"
 > }}}
 >
 > (so its a little different from what we had with 22.p20) as discussed
 [http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/3732#comment:36 here])
 >
 >
 Could you please confirm if the rule for IP 192.168.11.14 was
 {{{
 c0a80b0e at 20
 }}}
  instead of
 {{{
 0ca80b0e at 20
 }}}
  (which is anyway incorrect)? I remmber we did verify this simple test.
 Thanks

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/3732#comment:39>
One Laptop Per Child <http://laptop.org/>
OLPC bug tracking system