[Dextrose] [Sugar-devel] Wanting to know a bit of (NetworkManager) workflow upon resume-from-suspend

[Ajay Garg]

Thanks Martin.

This REALLY is a useful mail. Thanks.

My comments inline.


On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Martin Abente <
martin.abente.lahaye at gmail.com> wrote:

> Probably the answer is that the start() method is not executed, which
> means there are different execution paths between reboot and resume.
>

Me thought the same. Thanks for the affirmation.





>
> Same happened with powerd, we had to include the script I mentioned in the
> previous response, _maybe_ there is something similar to the powerd
> postresume.d in NM...
>

Thanks a ton for this light.
I will look up into it; and will get back to you.





>
> In any case, IIRC there was supposed to be a driver patch that would
> replace all these hacks for disabling the mesh (for good). Any clue what
> happened with it?
>

Well, that would be the ultimate cleanest solution.
However, I believe that is not present, since the issue is happening
anyways.


Ccing dextrose.


Thanks again.


Thanks and Regards,
Ajay



>
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>wrote:
>
>> which actually brings me back to my original question ::
>>
>> """
>> Why is it so that putting the 'disable-mesh-script' in the 'start()'
>> method of '/etc/init.d/Networkmanager' works (always) for (re)boot; but
>> never works for resume-upon-suspend?
>> """
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ajay
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Paul.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Paul Fox <pgf at laptop.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ajay wrote:
>>>>  > Any ideas please, regarding the two latest queries :) ?
>>>>  >
>>>>  > Regards,
>>>>  > Ajay
>>>>  >
>>>>  > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>  >
>>>>  > > Thanks Martin and Jon for the replies.
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Jon Nettleton <
>>>> jon.nettleton at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Martin Abente
>>>>  > >> <martin.abente.lahaye at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>  > >> > Are you guys still using this?
>>>>  > >> >
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  >
>>>> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose-platform/mainline/blobs/master/etc/powerd/post
>>>>  > resume.d/disable_mesh.sh
>>>>  > >> >
>>>>  > >> > If so, you should remove it IF there is no way to guarantee
>>>> that it
>>>>  > >> will run
>>>>  > >> > before NM picks up the device. At least it will avoid the
>>>> crash...
>>>>  > >> >
>>>>  > >> > I would ask in the NM community if there is a better way to
>>>> disable a
>>>>  > >> > particular device, like banning a device(?).
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> Edit /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> Add a line to the [main] section like
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> no-auto-default=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (obviously replacing the x's with
>>>> the
>>>>  > >> mac-address of your mesh device.)
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > > This should be a lot cleaner solution.
>>>>  > > However, two queries ::
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > > a)
>>>>  > > Doing "ifconfig" on the XO-1, only shows information for "eth0"
>>>> and "lo"
>>>>  > > (no mesh device listed).
>>>>  > > So, how can the mac address for the mesh device be found?
>>>>
>>>> it's the same as that for eth0.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does that mean, that banning eth0-mac-address prevent the loading of
>>> wifi-hardware-device as well (in obvious addition to mesh) ?
>>> This seems very pricky.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  > > b)
>>>>  > > Are mac address for XO-1s, EXACTLY same, for every XO-1 on this
>>>> planet?
>>>>
>>>> of course not.  how would they tell one another apart?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Alright.
>>> But my first doubt (same mac address for mesh-hardware and
>>> wifi-hardware) has put me in topspin :~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ajay
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> paul
>>>>
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > > Looking forward to a reply.
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > > Thanks and Regards,
>>>>  > > Ajay
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> This does not stop NM from managing your device, but does stop it
>>>> from
>>>>  > >> auto-connecting the device.  You would still be able to go into
>>>> NM and
>>>>  > >> manually enable the mesh network.   If you want NM to completely
>>>> leave
>>>>  > >> the device alone you can go one more step.
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> Also in /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> change the plugins line to
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> plugins=ifcfg-rh,keyfile
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> Then add a section that looks like this.
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> [keyfile]
>>>>  > >> unmanaged-devices=mac:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (Where X's are the mac
>>>> address
>>>>  > >> of the device you want to ignore)
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> Hope that helps, let me know if you have further questions.
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >> -Jon
>>>>  > >>
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > >
>>>>  > part 2     text/plain                 129
>>>>  > _______________________________________________
>>>>  > Devel mailing list
>>>>  > Devel at lists.laptop.org
>>>>  > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>>>
>>>> =---------------------
>>>>  paul fox, pgf at laptop.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/dextrose/attachments/20120501/2f1dd3cc/attachment-0001.html>