-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unable to make a DX213 work with a DS920+ #41
Comments
Which DSM version is the DS920+ using? There were 3 different hardware versions of DS920+ (the original, revision 2 and revision 3). I'm wondering if yours is a r2 or r3 but the script didn't detect it so it edited model.dtb instead of model_r2.dtb or model_r3.dtb What do these commands return?
|
And these:
|
Hello, please find bellow the results of the commands you have asked for. Edit : The DS920+ is running DSM 7.2.1-69057 Update 5
|
I was hoping your DS920+ was revision 2 or 3. I just decompiled and compared the DS920+ model.dtb, model_r1.dtb and model_r2.dtb for "DSM 7.2.1 with Update 1" and they all the same. I also compared model.dtb and model_r1.dtb for the other 4 Synology models that have a revision 1 and they were also the same. There differences in the eSATA port setting in DSM 7.2.1 but I'm still investigating why they are different. Almost everything you are seeing is what I see on my DS720+ (with DSM 7.2.1 update 5) after running syno_enable_eunit.sh and selecting Restore and then rebooting.
Do you see DX213 like in pictures 1, 3 and 4? The only difference is syno_slot_mapping sees the DX213 on my DS720+
I assume when you ran the script via SSH it did not find your DX213? Which would be why you scheduled the script with |
What i write bellow is true for both when (i) I run the script in SSH to enable the DX213 and (ii) when I run the script and select
I scheduled the script with --eunit=DX213 before trying to run the script in SSH because I like to avoid enabeling SSH. When I found that I could not make the DX213 work, I tried with SSH. Even though I assumed the eSata cable to be working, I will try to order a new one from Synology. Maybe there is an extra pin dedicated to detecting enuits (in addition to data pins) ? |
When your DX213 was with a DS716+II was it using the same cable? Have you tried the eSATA cable from the eSata dock you got from Amazon? My DX213 is using a generic eSATA cable. I did buy a genuine Synology eSATA because it has the retaining screws to prevent it accidentally being unplugged, but I haven't used it yet. |
Yes it was with the same cable, the original Synology one
No, not yet. I will try on the 19th and let you know (currently away from home)
An eSata cable is an eSata cable. It should not matter from which vendor it comes, I believe the pin layout is standardized. I was reading the other issue (#28) and from what I could understand, it is not the cable that does the check if it is a Synology eunit or a classic eSata dock, there is a check for a vendor ID / device ID done by the NAS. For some reason the DS716+ does the check, but the DS920+ does not even get the info that there is a check to be done (as I dont get the same warning as you in picture 4) >> This has to be eSata port or cable related |
I just tried with and without the script activated. Still nothing. I do not understand why :@ |
My DS920 also cannot use DX513, the problem seems to be similar
My English sucks. |
Hello, following up on our chat on reddit, I have a spare DX213 that I would like to make it work with a DS920+
So far, I have been unable to do so.
On the software side:
/volume1/system/scripts/synology_enable_eunits/syno_enable_eunit.sh -e --unit=dx213 --autoupdate=3
sudo syno_slot_mapping
whith the DX213 plugged in, I get:sudo syno_slot_mapping | grep 'Eunit port'
with the DX213 plugged in, I get nothingOn the hardware side:
Power
is blue, (ii)Status
is off, (iii)eSata
is geen, (iv)Disk 1
is geen and (v)Disk 2
is offAre there other potential failpoints that I have not yet checked ?
Thank you for taking the time to try and help me !
Regards,
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: