Speedtouch 546 Problem?

Hi,

I've just bought a Speedtouch 546v6 (6.1.4.6 firmware) as a replacement for my 510v4.

The connection seems to be working fine BUT there's a weird problem.

The DSL Info screen shows the Data Transferred as 00/00 and NEVER updates! The Internet info screen does however.

Also, EVERY time I re-sync the router, that same DSL info screen shows over 20,000 CRC errors (Up) on each attempt!

Also, the dbm power levels seem to be quoted incorrectly as 12dBm up and 11.5 dBm down, whereas the dmt app shows the dBm power level down as 17 dBm or so!

I think that there may well be a hardware fault here on the DSL side, or at least the part that is measuring the data, but SNR, time elapsed and attenuation all seem to be reported fine.

I flashed the firmware down to 5.4 but exactly the same problems, so I re-flashed back to 6.1.4.6 again.

Anyone else getting weird problems like this also? I'm wondering whether to send it back for a replacement?

TIA

Noticed the same on the one I got for work last week (turned out to be a v6 model)- seems to work as expected though. Must be a firmware bug.

Hi TMA and thanks for the reply,

Hmmmm interesting!

Well, I flashed to the 5.4 firmware and got exactly the same results, so I don't think that that is the problem.

Aside from this 'anomaly', it appears to be working fine, but it just doesn't seem right somehow.

Anyone else with a 546(v6) get the same?

Perhaps there's a problem with not the chip that contains the firmware but with one of the other chips on the 546's pcb? (I'm assuming the pcb utilises more than just one, single chip). In other words, it could be that line statistics are calculated in a chip separate to the main one and that there's a design or manufacturing fault with that.

Yes, it could well be that meditator.

Do you also have a 546 and get the same problem?

he has the v5 and I also have the v5 these dont have this problem.

Ok, understood Chrysalis.

Well, there doesn't seem much point in sending it back for a replacement if it's gonna do the same thing, so I'll live with it I suppose.

I'll e-mail Speedtouch.co.uk though and let them know about it.

Thanks for your help guys.

on my 585 it shows 4million FEC errors within 1 hour :P

No, I haven't got that problem. I've got the 546v5 and I've used both the v5.4.0.14 and v6.1.4.7 firmwares on it but have never encountered the problem you've described. I'm currently using the v6.1.4.7 firmware. The 546v5 and the 546v6 models both use Broadcom processor chips but the chips are, in fact, different.

Yes, I'd let the technical people at Speedtouch know that this problem exists on your version. You never know, you might be lucky and it'll turn out to be something that's fixable by, in fact, a firmware mod. The sooner Speedtouch know about it, the sooner they can start working on a mod to fix it. But if it's a hardware design fault .............. .

Hi meditator.

Well, I've e-mailed a tech support query to Speedtouch UK this morning via their website and will see what transpires.

Yes, hopefully a firmware fix may cure it.

In the meantime, it'd be really helpful if anyone else out there who has a v6 546 could reply here and test the same info screen to confirm that it's not just a problem that myself and TMA have, in case Speedtouch decide to fob us off with excuses.

So, please let us know.

TIA

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Mon 16-Oct-06 13:30:45)

Had that problem with my 516v6 since day one and in every firmware version, the CPU stats don't do anything either, always on 0%. Knowing Speedtouch's attitude to this kind of thing I seriously doubt they'll fix it, they treat their customers with contempt like most companies these days.

Thanks ZeroFlux.

That pretty well nails it then.

The mothers at Speedtouch still haven't even had the decency to acknowledge my query from Monday either!

Wasters...

I was half tempted to get a full refund, but TBH am finding ADSL2+ much more reliable than the old ADSL1 from the 510v4.

Why not send it back and get a 546 V5 ? That works.

Apparently the chipset on the v5 gets really hot from reports I've heard?

The v6 gets 'warm-very warm'. Perhaps that's one reason for the change in versions?

When you can't get any response from the wasters at Speedtouch it's hard to work out just what's true and what's not!

Can't say I've noticed my 546 V5's getting really hot. Warm ? Possibly. But certainly not as warm as some modem/routers I've used in the past. Mine are on 24/7 - no problems so far. I have an SMC router here that you can fry eggs on - still works OK, though

P.S. The main reason for the change was that the V6 is RoHS compliant (no lead in the construction).

Edited by deleted (Thu 19-Oct-06 17:33:55)

Ok, thanks zebedeee.

Not sure what to do now then really TBH!

I suppose it all depends how important the stats are to you. I bought the 546 because it works well, and because you can use it with DMT to monitor and tweak the performance. The V5 does this equally as well as the V6, so I'm happy. As an engineer, I've been handling solder containing lead for more than 40 years, so the RoHS compliance doesn't bother me.

I too had reservations about the thermal performances of both the 546v5 and 546v6. Being a retired electronics engineer, I'm very fussy about such things. Regular contributors to these Speedtouch forums will know that I sought opinions on the thermal performance of the 546v5 in particular, over several months.

In the end, I took a chance and bought the 546v5 and, frankly, I don't know what all the fuss was about! Despite it having a higher input supply voltage and higher current rating than most other comparable routers, it runs only mildly warm. In my view, it doesn't warrant any additional ventilation of the case and, in fact, runs no warmer than my previous Billion router of similar physical size.

So, Blobby, don't be over-concerned about the 546v5 running warm. By all accounts, anyway, it'll run more coolly than the v6 and is, at this stage, an altogether more stable router. Get your existing router exchanged, if you possibly can. Go on, go for it!

I've found exactly the same disparity with the Netgear DG834 - some people said that it gets very hot, whereas the one I used was barely warm. I came to the (guessed) conclusion that wireless routers generate much more heat than wired ones, and it's wireless ones which get hot.

Eric

Hi guys.

Well it's very reassuring to hear your comments about the heat factors on the v5.

I'm also an ex TV / Computer engineer too! LOL

I was beginning to think I was the only one that actually cared about how hot these things run!

Similarly, when some of these PC games run the CPU at 100% utilisation and the temperature rises by 15C I was amazed by how blas

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Fri 20-Oct-06 14:05:25)

http://www.dslsource.co.uk/product_details.asp?idProduct=87

Or http://www.dsldepot.co.uk/product_details.asp?idProduct=516

v5 is a superior chipset v6 was focused on cost savings, the ventilation may appear to mean it will run cooler then the v5 and the v5 had a heat flaw but this isnt the case. The reason for the ventilation on the v6 is because the chipset itself will run hotter.

I fully concur with your feelings toward devices that run unduly hot. However, as I've already pointed out, I don't think you'll be displeased with the 546v5. Do be sensible with its placement, though, keeping it away from other warm or hot airstreams and not sitting it on surfaces that are already warm.

I find it hugely ironic that, for four solid months, I pleaded with Speedtouch, dslsource.co.uk, dsl-warehouse.com and broadbandbuyer.co.uk to stock the 546v6 but they all came up with excuses not to do so. In the end, I just gave up and, largely reassured by comments from one or two specific adslguide 546v5 users, I bought a 546v5 instead. Of course, no sooner had I bought the v5, when Speedtouch and one of the other retailers immediately decided to finally make the v6 available! Well, I'm glad I selected the v5 after all, because it appears that Thomson Speedtouch have produced a bit of a lemon, in the v6.

BTW, I don't regard

Edited by deleted (Sat 21-Oct-06 01:09:11)

Well, I'm glad this thread reaffirms your choice with the v5 meditator and thanks for the info on the chipset Chrysalis.

I got another reply back from the Thompson engineer on Saturday after he tested the report I made, and he CONFIRMED that the v6 router DOES have a fault!

He could not explain why the DSL screen erroneously reported all those CRC / HEC errors and said that he's reported it to his supervisors and there should be either a hardware update or firmware update in the future.

In the meantime, I've contacted Speedtouchonline today for a refund as they don't have any v5 models in stock any more! Oops.

There's also another problem I've discovered over the weekend.

Simply turning the router on/off to resynch sometimes causes the PC to reset itself! This is possibly due to the Ethernet connection change of state? I've also seen this when manually plugging/unplugging the ethernet connector into the router. This often either cause a BSOD with a cryptic 'IRQ Less than' (or something like that) error or a reset too. The onboard Broadcom 440x is connected to that port.

Not very nice anyway if you were in the middle of editing or whatever.

I know it's not a USB socket. but surely powering down the router shouldn't cause the PC to reset?!

Trying to get a v5 replacement now. Will try DSl source later. I quite fancy replacing my model with the one here in the blue top.

http://www.dslsource.co.uk/products.asp?idprodtype=2

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Mon 23-Oct-06 12:41:15)

your pc resetting will be unrelated to the router, some kind of ethernet issue possibly to do with it sharing an irq address. If its a pci card try moving it to a different slot.

If all those errors turn out to be a hardware fault in the router, Speedtouch and their distributors are going to be faced with an horrendous problem of having to recall all of those particular routers. Under those circumstances, my guess is that they'd quickly conclude it to be impractical and wouldn't bother. Unless you succeed in getting the refund you've mentioned, you'll have to hope that the problem will be correctable by a firmware update later on.

My router often disables the Ethernet interface. There are several valid situations where this happens. But without anything untoward happening. I don't get the PC freezing or locking up as a result. As has already been suggested, your BSOD problem might be due to some sort of IRQ conflict. If it's a PCI Ethernet card you're using for connecting the router to the PC, try it in a different PCI slot, one where it'll be allotted an IRQ all of its own and not one shared with some other PCI device. Look in Windows's Computer Management section for the list of IRQs for your PC and the devices or services to which each one is currently allocated. Despite what a lot of people think, there's nothing wrong in principle with the sharing of IRQs but what you do need to be careful about, with IRQs, is that system resources are handled properly. If your PC is listed in Device Manager as an ACPI machine, it helps if you set things up in the System BIOS so that the BIOS, rather than Windows, allocates (dynamically) system resources. That way, you avoid clashes for memory space. So, make sure that the settings in your System BIOS are correct in that regard. Read your motherboard manual carefully and make any necessary changes. A lot of people do get IRQ handling wrong.

In reply to:

---

If all those errors turn out to be a hardware fault in the router, Speedtouch and their distributors are going to be faced with an horrendous problem of having to recall all of those particular routers. Under those circumstances, my guess is that they'd quickly conclude it to be impractical and wouldn't bother.

---

I'm sure that's what they would conclude too, because although most of the bugs are annoying, they don't stop the router doing what it was designed to do. Heck, if router manufacturers recalled the models which had bugs in them, half of the D-Link range would disappear overnight

Yes, agreed.

Doubt that there wil ever be a mass recall of these routers for this particular problem.

Sent the 546 back for a refund yesterday and am having problems sourcing a 546 v5 now.

Speedtouch online and DSL source only have v6 models now.

Not all that tempted by the

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Thu 26-Oct-06 13:07:58)

a nic might get away with sharing with something like usb but I never heard of 2 nics sharing with each other before so I am fairly certian that is the cause of your bsod. As mediator suggested the lan connection going down may well have helped trigger the bsod but wouldnt be the fault.

Right, yes it does seem odd.

The other NIC (another D-Link gigabit card) is on IRQ 21. That's connected to my daughter's PC.

I've tried changing the resource settings manually (i.e. untick 'use automatic settings'), but the option to do so is greyed out!

That particular problem may be because of a 'repair install' done about 8 months ago.

I have a feeling that the 'permissions' may have got screwed up a bit?

The inability to remove the automatic settings applies across the board i.e. to the sound card, graphics card, network adapters, everything.

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Thu 26-Oct-06 16:56:11)

you wont be able to change the irq in windows you will need to swap the pci slot its in.

Not sure if we're at cross-purposes here, but 'automatic settings' is usually an indication that the BIOS is in auto-control of the resources, ie. of the assigning of the resources. So, it looks as though that's right, in your case. If you now try to change the IRQs manually, it won't work; it's not meant to.

This is obvious I know, and I may be misunderstanding your description, but because you're using a Speedtouch 546, the only NIC connection needed on YOUR PC is a single one. And the only NIC connection needed on YOUR DAUGHTER'S PC is also a single one.

Edited by deleted (Fri 27-Oct-06 17:48:45)

Yeah, slight misunderstanding meditator, but I didn't really explain properly.

Re the IRQ problem. I think the automatic settings being greyed out was there even when the BIOS wasn't handling the resource settings too. So, until I re-install WinXP again from scratch I won't be able to verify the permissions problem unless someone else can in the meantime.

Re the router. Well having had the 510v4 with 4 ports (and recently the 546v6) the 'obvious' solution is to let both kids have 2 of the spare ports on the router, right? WRONG!

The lil' so and so's stole ALL the bandwidth constantly with p2p uploading and downloading and spyware!

So, for the past 18 months or so they're connected via ICS using 2 D-Link Gigabit Ethernet NICS which each have a separate PCI slot.

My PC is connected to the router via the onboard (motherboard) Broadcom Ethernet controller. So, altogether there are 3 Ethernet controllers.

The Broadcom has been assigned IRQ 20 and is shared with one of the D-Link NICs. The other D-Link NIC has been assigned IRQ 21.

All the bandwidth control is done with BWMeter which strictly limits both of their upload AND download bandwidth. Internet heaven (for me anyway). LOL

Perversely, the graphics card IRQ shares with some USB controller!

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Fri 27-Oct-06 18:17:12)

ouch the gfx shouldnt be sharing either not a very good motherboard by the sounds of it.

Go into your bios and see if there is an option for assignign a dedicated irq to the agp there normally is.

If possible also disable all usb functions in the bios, if you use usb you cant do this.

With the network card irq sharing it sort of works like this. The motherbaord will have hard irq values for different slots so 2 slots usually share with each other, anothe rslot will usually share with agp and another slot would usually share with usb, sometimes a slot will share with some other onboard device, for a pci card to have its own irq one would usually use one of the 2 pci slots that share with each other but not the other one. So You can probably only have one of the lan cards have its own irq but if the other shares with usb or something it should be ok just not a good idea to share with another lan card.

The bios may allow you to manually set the irq but it would be for the IRQ line not just for the lan card itself so what would happen is you change the irq for both lan cards together and they would still be sharing, this is why the only way to solve the conflict is to open the case and physically switch the card. If you want to use ICS tho there is no need to have 3 lan cards, you could cut it down to 2 by attaching a simple hub to the 2nd card and then the family pcs into that hub, it may be possible to switch it down to 1 by having them all in the broadband router, disabling nat on the router so only your pc has the internet access and ip then using ics from that to the family pcs with the brodband router also acting as a hub but that may not be possible I have never tried that kind of setup.

I don't altogether agree with what you say, Chrysalis.

Unless Microsoft have recently changed things, the BIOS will be automatically in charge of system resources (and therefore the allocation of IRQs) when the PC is set up as an ACPI machine, which is the default condition for PCs produced in recent years. Although you can change to a certain degree which PCI card uses which IRQ, you can do this only by trial-and-error repositioning of the cards in the PCI bus and the results are limited because they'll be what the BIOS decides, not you, the user.

Attempting instead to set IRQs manually, via the BIOS, usually fails, simply because the PC is running as an ACPI machine. Expand "Computer", in the Device Manager listings. The only way you can assign IRQs manually is to change the hal format, which would mean changing the Computer from an ACPI machine to a straighforward machine. This will be possible only by reinstalling the operating system and intervening in the initial setup (F6 or some such key, I think) to ensure that the machine isn't auto-configured as ACPI.

Provided the rules have been followed and you've enough memory to go round, IRQ sharing is not necessarily a bad thing. IRQ sharing doesn't automatically lead to blue screens and the like.

As for the sharing of the AGP graphics card's IRQ, again that's often found to be so, with any USB controller that's in use. But that's not automatically bad. I recently added more USB ports myself, via the PCI bus, and have ended up with my AGP card's IRQ being shared. But no problems have arisen as a result.

You not disagreeing with me at all, some bioses but very few allow manipulation of irq addresses but tweaking these settings often doesnt change anything in terms of irq conflicts as you just suggested.

Windows can use the bios irq values or it cannot, some bioses have a value allowing the toggling of a pnp os yes/no this is what I believe allows windows to set its own irq values or not. However even if windows can set its own irq values it will still be limited by the irq value in the hardware, have you heard inta intb intc intd values? Sometimes these are adjustable in the bios and are at least usually documented in the motherboard manual.

They are 4 hard wired irq paths usually shared between a dozen or so devices so many of them will always be sharing, often usb, raid controllers and onboard sound devices share with 1 or 2 pci slots, agp shares with another pci slot, and 2 pci slots share with each other. Thats why when you try doing things like disabling com ports and lpt ports the pci devices dont move to the new empty irq because it cant. However changing the HAL type affects this behaviour.

APM doesnt support irq sharing so this is the most likely configuration that would allow any type of irq manipulation in windows, and if you remember the ms dos days soundcards etc. irq value could be adjusted after bootup. ACPI which most pcs use utilises irq sharing based on the four int values and APIC I am not sure how it works but opens up new higher irq numbers and supports ACPI features, however I have noticed on APIC like ACPI irqs cannot be changed in windows and devices often still share with each other with many irqs sitting unused, it can sometimes stop devices sharing an irq over an ACPI configuration but I believe they will still be sharing the hardwired int value.

TO change the HAL as you said it involves formatting the pc and pressing F6, much much easier to open the case and move the card to another slot which seems to have left the OP stumbled.

Yup, I agree.

There is nothing wrong with having 2 NIC's in a PC. What you want to avoid is sharing a busy interrupt, like USB.

usb is designed to be shared supposedbly, its more legacy stuff that doesnt like sharing.

Nothing wrong with 2 nics but not good when they share with each other, did you just skim my post or read it.

*sigh*

I have told you 3 times now, windows cannot change irq values and you keep trying to change it in the control panel.

I am sorry I wont offer any more advice as it isnt been taken in.

its not a fault you cannot change the irq its design.

To be honest, your replies are so rude and terse, I don't think I'll bother reading them at all. Since you seem to know everything, I don't know why you bother asking anything.

Steady on, Chrysalis isn't terse and rude. He's just giving his opinion. Opinions on the Internet have to be taken with a pinch of salt. You make of them what you will. I'm sure Chrysalis was only trying to help.

He's right.

quote
v5 is a superior chipset v6 was focused on cost savings


I would be interested to learn more about this, have you any links to tests or articles

Thanks

performance wise I think they the same but v5 just runs cooler.

Dont know of any spec sheets for the chipsets sorry.

I have just bought a 546i v6 it seems to work ok except for the problem that started this thread but after looking through all the menus cannot find an option to upgrade the firmware. The only option seems to be via the cd. They say the software is digitally encrypted for your benifit but seems more like DRM at its worst. Unless I can find a way via telnet to upgrade it will be going back as I use Linux and the cd is Windows (tm) so just a coaster.

their is a seperate tool for flashing.

sometimes the firmware is the tool and its just like running an installer.

@titan,

Hi, there's a CLI guide for the 546 here:

http://www.thomsontelecompartner.com/en/products/viewanaccessproduct.php?id=108

There appears to be a few commands for upgrades on P605 (software - bit sparse!) and P627- (upgrade).

Hope you can make sense of all that! You Linux guys are used to all that CLI stuff though no doubt. HTH anyway.

Having suffered major problems with Pipex CS and the BT line itself (yet again) the 510 router just wasn't capable of dealing with all the ATM CRC errors. Also, with only a 30 day warranty on second hand v5s I relented to keep the kids happy and re-bought another v6 router! LOL

Still the same bugs as initially reported of course, but performance is fantastic though.

As for the IRQ problem, yes it's nothing to do with the 546 as the 510 also caused similar problems.

Just lately, the PC has literally been resetting itself for no apparent reason. When booting Windows it seems to 'hang' whilst enabling the networking then bang, it resets the PC! Weird.

I set the PNP aware=YES again in the BIOS and checked whether Windows now allowed you to untick the 'Use Automatic settings' checkbox and it still doesn't!

Also, in the BIOS you can manually asign IRQs for the PCI slots but the range on offer is something like 5-15 IIRC. Whatever setting I use for the PNP OS aware setting, the IRQ assigned for the onboard Broadcom ethernet NIC is always 20, and for the other 2 PCI NICS they always get assigned 20 and 21!

So, I wonder if anyone has any suggestions how to proceed?

BTW, The NICS are in more or less the ONLY places they can be on the motherboard due to the physical construction of the motherboard, so that isn't really an option for changing IRQs unfortunately.

Edit:

Well, with a bit of careful manoeuvring, managed to get the conflicting NIC into another slot.

According to the BIOS manual, it turns out that the slot that that NIC was in shares its IRQ with the onboard LAN, so that explains that problem!

Also the AGP slot shares its IRQ with an onboard USB controller, so that can't be helped either.

Now, every NIC has an individual IRQ and 2 of them don't share with anything else. Also, I reset the BIOS to default values and disabled the PNP OS aware option. Hopefully that'll do it.

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Sat 04-Nov-06 18:09:06)

Thanks Blobbyx2, I had found the the telnet and fumbled my way around it, well sort of. and downloaded the cli guide from www.speedtouch.com/support.htm. Glad you sorted your problems out, there is no way I would go back to windows now and it is bound to get worse with Vista. probably be posting again soon for help with telnet, I am not too proud. :<)

You're welcome titan.

I think the CLI guide on the Speedtouch.co.uk/support site is for the 5.3.1 firmware, whereas the link above is for the v6 models. Maybe there's not too much difference though.

Tried Linux once (FC3). Liked the security. Hated all the CLI stuff. Gave that up in the 80's! LOL

Also, it screwed up my booting using Partition Magic (a known bug with FC3) which I wasn't too pleased about. It was nice to have triple-boot 98SE/XP Pro/Linux.

Good luck with the Telnetting. Sure somebody'll help you out if you get stuck.

Edited by BlobbyBlobby (Sat 04-Nov-06 18:52:36)

I got the 546v6 last week to replace an old Origo router and have been impressed with it so far. The only problem I do have is sometimes when I click on a link when browsing a "page cannot be displayed" link comes up inmmediately and I have to refresh a couple of times to get the oage to load in firefox.

That was my first router, an Origo from eBuyer!

There's some debate on the Firefox support forums about that problem as to whether it's a bug in the browser or not, but I've been getting that using the 510 too.

Anyway, one thing you can try is:

Speedtouch->Configuration->Configure then under 'System Configuration' set 'Web Browsing Interception' to 'Disabled'.

See if it makes any difference?

Have you tried FF2.0 yet btw?

Yep the Origo Ebuyer here too. I'll try that Web browsing interception. Not tried version 2.0 yet either so thats my next step.