NanoPi Neo2 and Neo Station NS-120B with armbian

[guidol]

Today I did get my NAS-Case "Neo Station NS-120B" for my NanoPi Neo2 (also useable with a normal NanoPi Neo).

Because I already did use the Neo2 with armbian (and had soldered all pins on the mainboard -  I ordered only the case without a new Neo2 with soldered pins)

I didnt want to write the FriendlyARM Image for NAS to my uSD.

 

After completing to built the Neo2 and the 2.5 HDD inside the case (and using the 12V PowerSupply I had) armbian did start up and I could normally SSH into my Neo2 - BUT I cant see the HDD or the HDD-controller (which should be connected via USB).

( @tkaisernow here the Neo2 do get his power over pins and not via the MicroUSB and the Neo2 not only has the "bigger" heat sink - now also the complete case is cooling the Neo2 ) 

 

There did come a thread - about the additional USB-Ports showing up at the Neo2 -  to my mind.
After a little search I did found the article of  @Lope and @Igor:

So I did add in /boot/armbianEnv.txt before my) last line (usbstoragequirks=0x2537:0x1066:u,0x2537:0x1068:u) in the file: 

overlays=usbhost0 usbhost2 usbhost3

After a reboot dmesg did recognize the HDD

[    2.251979] usb 3-1: new high-speed USB device number 2 using ehci-platform
[    2.445211] scsi host0: uas
[    3.098627] scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     JMicron  Tech             0227 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
[    3.129039] sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
[    3.129904] usbcore: registered new interface driver uas
[    3.130418] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250 GB/233 GiB)
[    3.130432] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 4096-byte physical blocks
[    3.130775] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
[    3.130791] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 5f 00 00 08
[    3.131526] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
[    3.155212]  sda: sda1
[    3.159285] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk

and lsusb did found the USB-HDD-controller JMicron JMS567 (USB 3.0 SATA-Controller connected to USB 2.0):
 

root@nanoneo2:~# lsusb
Bus 003 Device 002: ID 152d:0578 JMicron Technology Corp. / JMicron USA Technology Corp.

the module for the controller was also loaded already:
 

root@nanoneo2:~#  lsmod
Module                  Size  Used by
uas                    24576  0

after that mounting the HDD was business as usual:
 

root@nanoneo2:~# cd /mnt
root@nanoneo2:/mnt# mkdir harddisc
root@nanoneo2:/mnt# mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/harddisc
The disk contains an unclean file system (0, 0).
The file system wasn't safely closed on Windows. Fixing.

and df did show the free space on the HDD (the HDD was preformat while using it on PC):
 

root@nanoneo2:/mnt/harddisc# df
Filesystem     1K-blocks    Used Available Use% Mounted on
udev              179036       0    179036   0% /dev
tmpfs              49460    1684     47776   4% /run
/dev/mmcblk0p1  15126944 3487428  11453712  24% /
tmpfs             247284       0    247284   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs               5120       0      5120   0% /run/lock
tmpfs             247284       0    247284   0% /sys/fs/cgroup
tmpfs             247284       0    247284   0% /tmp
log2ram            51200    1968     49232   4% /var/log
tmpfs              49460       0     49460   0% /run/user/0
/dev/sda1      244196348  122948 244073400   1% /mnt/harddisc

The case does also include a realtime-clock (with CR2032 battery as buffer) which shows up in dmesg:
 

[    1.717710] sun6i-rtc 1f00000.rtc: rtc core: registered rtc-sun6i as rtc0
[    1.717716] sun6i-rtc 1f00000.rtc: RTC enabled

 

 

Later I will check
- hdparm - let the HDD sleep after a while

- install SMB and create a share (or more) (FTP is already installed)
- create SMB-User

 

 

 

[tkaiser]

13 minutes ago, guidol said:

now also the complete case is cooling the Neo2

 

How's that possible? I always thought air is an insulator?

 

USB on headers not active by default is due to kernel maintainers wanting it that way. On our OMV images this gets changed by default: https://github.com/armbian/build/blob/fcd1ee15c38289f696ace5072c794d633d3c067c/config/templates/customize-image.sh.template#L159 (see there also for a few other performance tweaks that might be suitable for performant NAS operation, especially the smb.conf tweaks, I would strongly recommend to use latest softy script to install Samba or if you're using a Debian flavour maybe even OMV)

[guidol]

19 minutes ago, tkaiser said:

 

How's that possible? I always thought air is an insulator?

I would strongly recommend to use latest softy script to install Samba or if you're using a Debian flavour maybe even OMV)

Yes - normaly thats right - but due to the case its "cold" air  The Neo2 here has now only 37 degree
Before I has installed the case it did show me 69 degree
 

 _   _                   ____  _   _   _              ____
| \ | | __ _ _ __   ___ |  _ \(_) | \ | | ___  ___   |___ \
|  \| |/ _` | '_ \ / _ \| |_) | | |  \| |/ _ \/ _ \    __) |
| |\  | (_| | | | | (_) |  __/| | | |\  |  __/ (_) |  / __/
|_| \_|\__,_|_| |_|\___/|_|   |_| |_| \_|\___|\___/  |_____|


Welcome to ARMBIAN 5.33.171011 nightly Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS 4.13.5-sunxi64
System load:   0.00 0.00 0.00   Up time:       1:14 hour
Memory usage:  6 % of 482MB     IP:            192.168.6.22
CPU temp:      37°C
Usage of /:    24% of 15G       storage/:      1% of 233G

Thanks for the SAMBA-Installation suggestion via the softy-script.
I had read that you seem to like OMV - but I did try installtions on Banana Pi and Raspberry Pi and often get error-messages and did read from othe users getting these messages on other computers....
So I decided to use the console for installing and configuring such things - and lern some commands

On the other hand I got a "old" single-drive Synology which can be configured via WebInterface - so I got booth

[tkaiser]

14 minutes ago, guidol said:

Yes - normaly thats right - but due to the case its "cold" air  The Neo2 here has now only 37 degree
Before I has installed the case it did show me 69 degree

 

Honestly I really don't trust that much into those internal readouts anyway. But back on topic, you're talking about a case responsible for lower temperatures now. But isn't the main difference now that your NEO2 is wearing FriendlyELEC's heatsink while it had no heatsink before?

In case that's different now I would be interested how temperatures look like without case.

 

19 minutes ago, guidol said:

I had read that you seem to like OMV

 

I just worked on providing clean and performant OMV images for ARM boards relying on Armbian's Debian Jessie flavour [1] since almost all available OMV images I found were more or less horrible (using shitty kernels and crappy settings). Settings matter a lot on those slow ARM boards, if you choose the wrong ones (or rely on distros that 'optimize'/'tune' only irrelevant stuff like DietPi for example) NAS performance might drop drastically. And I posted the links above for a reason: since it's easy to get which settings are important by studying the respective install scripts.

 

[1] since when trying to install OMV on Ubuntu it can't work due to dependency mismatches -- that's why you find so many reports on the net of 'OMV does not work on Armbian' since people don't understand that it's either Debian or Ubuntu what they run.

[guidol]

1 hour ago, tkaiser said:

 

But back on topic, you're talking about a case responsible for lower temperatures now.
But isn't the main difference now that your NEO2 is wearing FriendlyELEC's heatsink while it had no heatsink before?

In case that's different now I would be interested how temperatures look like without case.

 

OMV: if you choose the wrong ones

Before I had a small cermic heat-sink at the H5 CPU - but the Neo2 was in the lower part of 3D-printed case from FriendlyARM.
Sure - now the heat-sink is much bigger  and from the case the ambient temperature around the heat-sink is lower the last rainy days

I did try the Banana Pi and RPi OMV Images from the official OMV-Webpage:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/openmediavault/files/Other armhf images/

[tkaiser]

22 minutes ago, guidol said:

Before I had a small cermic heat-sink at the H5 CPU - but the Neo2 was in the lower part of 3D-printed case from FriendlyARM.

 

Most probably the heatsink wasn't that efficient and almost all those SBC enclosures are such an bizarre fail if it's about heat dissipation. I tested this years ago with a DHT22 sensor inside such a 'standard enclosure' and internal temperature was +20°C above ambient temperature around. Metal enclosures with direct contact to heat emitting sources like the SoC would be way more efficient than those 'traditional' approaches attaching a heatsink of any size and then cramping everything in a tiny enclosure without direct contact to the outside (for a good implementation see ODROID HC1 for example, but with all those NanoPi it also works excellent, a customer is attaching them directly to 'huge heatsinks' (screwed to the inside of rack cabinets with a thin thermal pad between SoC and the metal)

 

30 minutes ago, guidol said:

I did try the Banana Pi and RPi OMV Images from the official OMV-Webpage:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/openmediavault/files/Other armhf images/

 

If you chose those provided within the last 2 months... they work flawlessly (personally tested over ten times each). But I should really stop to care about reports that affect crappy hardware (Micro USB for DC-IN)

[guidol]

On 26.10.2017 at 5:10 PM, tkaiser said:

In case that's different now I would be interested how temperatures look like without case.

without the case I got 35 degree while idle and 37 degree with the case

(dont know why - but I did lost my openshh-server installation - so I had to open the case and use the serial-TTL-port and did reinstall the openssh-server.)

[tkaiser]

14 hours ago, guidol said:

without the case I got 35 degree while idle and 37 degree with the case

 

Thanks for confirming. It's only the better heatsink that makes a difference. When you do a few hours some disk benchmarks (then the HDD starts to emit more heat and heats up the air inside the enclosure) the difference between with and w/o enclosure would be larger. IIRC when doing such an enclosure test the internal temperature was able to increase up to 7°C. But this really doesn't matter that much since the components are made for this and also HDDs don't have a problem with higher temperatures.

 

 

[doru]

Well, it seems to be something wrong with my system because I have 49 Celsius degrees on the processors

without any activity.

 

I tried to use this hardware configuration ( https://www.cnx-software.com/2017/06/18/nanopi-neo-nas-kit-review-assembly-openmediavault-installation-setup-and-benchmarks/#comment-544646 ) but with latest OMV image from FriendlyARM and HDD temperature is increasing to 60 degree. I suspect the HDD release to much heat and the aluminium case don't have the capacity to dissipate efficiently the heat.

 

I changed the HDD with a SSD, and now, when I transfer the files the processor temperature is around 55 degrees and the SSD around 45 degrees; without any activity processor temperature is 49 degree and SSD temperature is 39 degree.

 

The transfer rate is the same 17 ~ 22 Mb/s.

 

Any way, I think the the difference between your temperature, 37, and mine 49, is to much....

 

 

 

 

Could be just software differences ? Armbian versus OMV ?

 

 

 

 

 

[tkaiser]

20 minutes ago, doru said:

Armbian versus OMV ?

 

This differentiation makes no sense since OMV sits on top of a Debian (be it Armbian or the Debian image FriendlyELEC uses -- main difference is most probably that the Armbian variant contains a lot more performance and other tweaks)

 

This OMV here https://sourceforge.net/projects/openmediavault/files/Other armhf images/OMV_3_0_90_Nanopineo2_4.13.10.img.xz/download is based on latest Armbian Jessie with pretty recent u-boot and kernel while FriendlyELEC's OMV uses stuff from the beginning of this year. Maybe that's the difference?

 

In case you've another SD card I would be really interested in results from our new OMV image since also your NAS performance numbers are horribly low. Please be aware that for SSH login to be enabled for root you need to use OMV web UI (either 'permit root login' on the SSH service tab or create a new users in the UI being member of sudo and ssh groups)

[guidol]

6 hours ago, tkaiser said:

In case you've another SD card I would be really interested in results from our new OMV image since also your NAS performance numbers are horribly low. 

Maybe the network is running 100MBit or a bad 1000MBit?

[doru]

8 hours ago, tkaiser said:

........

In case you've another SD card I would be really interested in results from our new OMV image since also your NAS performance numbers are horribly low. Please be aware

........

 

 

Ok, I will do some tests with another SD cards and I will report the results here.

 

1 hour ago, guidol said:

Maybe the network is running 100MBit or a bad 1000MBit?

 

Rather a bad 1000 MBit network configuration.

Also I have intention to test another network configuration. Currently the Neo2 NAS pass through the traffic through a gigabit switch, gigabit router to a gigabit network card from my main computer.

 

I hope to post the results until this Saturday.

 

Thanks for your advices and sugestions

(SSH, check network configuration...)

[tkaiser]

11 minutes ago, doru said:

Also I have intention to test another network configuration. Currently the Neo2 NAS pass through the traffic through a gigabit switch, gigabit router to a gigabit network card from my main computer.

Well, if throwing in that many components you simply don't know what you're testing. Is it the NEO 2 and it's NAS implementation or your home network?

 

Such tests can only work if all potential bottlenecks are known and if you want to get results with some meaning bottlenecks that can invalidate test results have to be eliminated before.

[doru]

22 minutes ago, tkaiser said:

Well, if throwing in that many components you simply don't know what you're testing. Is it the NEO 2 and it's NAS implementation or your home network?

 

Such tests can only work if all potential bottlenecks are known and if you want to get results with some meaning bottlenecks that can invalidate test results have to be eliminated before.

 

Yes, you are right. I will test with 'usualy' configuration, the NanoPi Neo2 connected direct through my router and I will try to avoid any another  factors which can influence the results like another network traffic during the tests. Even I will take off the two storage (one HDD and one SSD) from USBs router.

 

I think the ideal configuration to test NanopiNeo2 NAS hardware and software configuration is to connect direct to my main computer through network card, but I am lost here, and I suppose that is not a real, day by day configuration.

 

Well, I will put here not just the result but my network configuration and even the hardware specification/model like SD, SSD, HDD etc. to have the right conclusions about the Nano potential and your software optimization.

[tkaiser]

11 minutes ago, doru said:

connected direct through my router

This should be avoided unless you really know your 'router' is in fact acting then just as a switch (since otherwise most probably the router is the real bottleneck). Better advise: use a GbE switch connected to the router (so stuff like DCHP works) and connect NEO2 and your client to the switch. If you've never tested the switch's throughput (must be +940 Mbits/sec) then this is of course also useless.

 

Anyway: Jean-Luc already tested with FriendlyELEC's OMV and published results on CNX. Since he's quick and smart I don't know whether he added some more OMV/Armbian tweaks based on my comments to his OMV installation or not and was just curious when I heard your low NAS performance scores. Maybe just focus on thermal results first if you test with 'our' OMV image now and postpone the performance stuff for later...

[guidol]

10 hours ago, doru said:

The transfer rate is the same 17 ~ 22 Mb/s.

 

What kind of files did you transfer? Many small files or one big file?
For not getting to much overhead with small files I do test with the image-files of armbian or other distros (.ISO)

I have to test it with the NanpPi Neo2 NAS (will post results later) - but with my Synology-NAS I do get up to 75MB/second on uncompressed Image-Files.

[tkaiser]

39 minutes ago, guidol said:

For not getting to much overhead with small files I do test with the image-files of armbian or other distros (.ISO)

That implements another bottleneck called 'client side storage'. I had this over at OMV forum a few times already that people try to 'benchmark' their NAS boxes and report a weird slowdown in server --> client direction after some time. Being asked about the storage, they answered SSD, I explained that many consumer SSDs can get pretty slow after some amount of data has been written continously (many of them get then as slow as 60 MB/s or even lower) but usually people don't accept these explanations since it's about blaming the server.

 

Easy alternative: Helios LanTest since it eliminates 'client side storage' influences completely (since test patterns are generated synthetically even for the 10GB test files) while on the other hand it could also be used to test the local storage on its own. LanTest does single thread testing with fixed block sizes which is not any more what Windows Explorer or macOS Finder are doing in the meantime. But that's also the reason it provides a much better picture of overall NAS performance.

[doru]

2 hours ago, guidol said:

 

What kind of files did you transfer? Many small files or one big file?

 

It was a single big file ~4 GB.

 

The transfer rate 17 - 22 Mb/s is when I uploaded the file to NAS. When I downloaded from server to my Windows 8.1 computer transfer rate was badly, 13 Mb/s...

 

And I obtained that bad transfer rates also when I used a USB 3 stick instead of SSD or HDD.

 

Also I tried to transfer 1.8 GB from a RAM disk....the same transfer rates.

[doru]

9 hours ago, tkaiser said:

This should be avoided unless you really know your 'router' is in fact acting then just as a switch (since otherwise most probably the router is the real bottleneck). Better advise: use a GbE switch connected to the router (so stuff like DCHP works) and connect NEO2 and your client to the switch.....

 

 

Just short test this evening.

 

I changed my network configuration like in your advice: both, Nanopi Neo2 NAS and my Windows 8.1 machine, connected through my TP-Link TL-SG108 switch.

 

The same maximum traffic speed, when I transferred just one big file (1.5Gb)  ~  21 Mb/s.

 

[doru]

On 11/14/2017 at 12:21 AM, tkaiser said:

 

This differentiation makes no sense since OMV sits on top of a Debian (be it Armbian or the Debian image FriendlyELEC uses -- main difference is most probably that the Armbian variant contains a lot more performance and other tweaks)

 

This OMV here https://sourceforge.net/projects/openmediavault/files/Other armhf images/OMV_3_0_90_Nanopineo2_4.13.10.img.xz/download is based on latest Armbian Jessie with pretty recent u-boot and kernel while FriendlyELEC's OMV uses stuff from the beginning of this year. Maybe that's the difference?

 

In case you've another SD card I would be really interested in results from our new OMV image since also your NAS performance numbers are horribly low. Please be aware that for SSH login to be enabled for root you need to use OMV web UI (either 'permit root login' on the SSH service tab or create a new users in the UI being member of sudo and ssh groups)

 

Ok, I made a new test:

 

- another SD card with your OMV image

- both NanopiNeo2-NAS and my client connected through a switch

- transfer a single 1.5 Gb files from a RAM disk from client to SSD on NAS

 

The number don't differ too much:

- processor temperature reported by 'armbianmonitor' ~ 51 Celsius degree

- SSD temperature reported by OMV ~ 41 Celsius degree

- the traffic speed transfer reported by Windows between 18 - 22 MB/s

 

It seems to be something wrong with my network configuration and, maybe, with NAS position related to high temperature.

 

Maybe my TP-Link TL-SG108 switch is the problem.... I will try to connect client - NAS through the router....

 

And, by the way, I put an electronic thermometer near to the NAS and the ambiental temperature showed is 28 Celsius degree.

 

[guidol]

5 hours ago, doru said:

It seems to be something wrong with my network configuration and, maybe, with NAS position related to high temperature.

Do you use Ethernet-cables that are made for Gigabit-Ethernet (CAT6)?
https://www.howtogeek.com/210326/not-all-ethernet-cables-are-equal-you-can-get-faster-lan-speeds-by-upgrading/

[doru]

15 hours ago, guidol said:

Do you use Ethernet-cables that are made for Gigabit-Ethernet (CAT6)?
https://www.howtogeek.com/210326/not-all-ethernet-cables-are-equal-you-can-get-faster-lan-speeds-by-upgrading/

 

Good question! It is just 5e. Theoretically support gigabit. The name on the cable box was 'Intex cat 5e'.

 

Maybe it is a good idea to retest in the last network configuration (server and client connected to the switch) but with better quality cables.

[guidol]

Today I did get my 2nd Neo Station NS-120B case - for my 2nd NanoPi Neo2.

I did check the armbian-Download page and did download the actual debian stretch server.

Installation went fine (have to format the HDD and set automount).

 

But I did see, that on my first NanoPi Neo2 NAS is the Ubuntu Xenial which - I think - was from the "private" directory of tkaiser while we checked the problems with the front-right USB-port.

[EDIT] Or was this only the Orange Pi R1 - and USB of the NanoPi NAS did work after the Update from the beginning of November..... sometimes I dont know if I do work on a OrangePi or NanoPi - because they are all Allwinner H2(+)/H3 or H5.

 

Strangely there is - after serveral updates - no armbian-config. But in the past it must been there, because my /etc/network/interfaces is generated by armbian-config and I know I did install SAMBA via armbian-config / softy.

 

Now the "big question" to @tkaiser: which server would be the better one for the NanoPi Neo2 NAS?
While using as NAS (and maybe OMV in the future) the debian-version is the right for running OMV.
Are there any advantages by the Ubuntu Xenial image or disadvantages by the debian-server Image?

 

Ubuntu without armbian-config now (find didnt find it): /var/log/armhwinfo.log has been uploaded to http://sprunge.us/ZIcb

Welcome to ARMBIAN 5.34.171116 nightly Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS 4.13.12-sunxi64

 

Fresh debian-server on NanoPi Neo NAS:  /var/log/armhwinfo.log has been uploaded to http://sprunge.us/FaYe 

Welcome to ARMBIAN 5.34.171116 nightly Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch) 4.13.12-sunxi64

[EDIT] With this debian server also the frontright-USB Port is working fine (with usb-soundcard)
 

[tkaiser]

41 minutes ago, guidol said:

no armbian-config

 

Yes, whether bug or feature I'm not sure. It seems armbian-config appeared, today it left and we don't discuss this stuff

 

Wrt which Armbian flavour: Honestly I can't tell the difference for headless use cases since Debian and Ubuntu behave the same, the age of packages usually isn't that important unlike with Desktop images and the dependency hell there to provide HW acceleration especially for video and if you want to use OMV you'll need to stick to Debian anyway.

[tkaiser]

1 hour ago, guidol said:

Neo Station NS-120B case

 

@guidol Can you please have a look which firmware version your JMS578 is running with? It's really as easy as downloading the archive Hardkernel/ODROID provided, unpacking it and running

JMS578FwUpdater/JMS578FwUpdate -d /dev/sda -v

directly afterwards (causing no harm, I let this JMicron firmware tool already check other JMicron, ASMedia, Genesys Logic, Prolific and Initio bridges -- they all behave well while all my JMicron bridges returned firmware version properly). Details: https://forum.armbian.com/topic/3317-orange-pi-zero-nas-expansion-board-with-sata-msata/?do=findComment&comment=43666

 

[guidol]

8 hours ago, tkaiser said:

 

@guidol Can you please have a look which firmware version your JMS578 is running with? It's really as easy as downloading the archive Hardkernel/ODROID provided, unpacking it and running

JMS578FwUpdater/JMS578FwUpdate -d /dev/sda -v

 

 

The NanoPi NAS Case hasnt a JMS578 but a JMS567. Boot are USB 3.1 Gen1 (5Gbps) Controllers - see
http://www.jmicron.com/product0201.html

BUT the JMS567 has a Controller for USB Type-C and seems to have some addtitions to the JMS578.

 

Anyway the software for reading the firmware-revision also does run with the JMS567

Booth NAS-Cases of my NanoPi Neo2 are showing the same firmware-revision:

root@nanoneo22:/home/guido/jms/JMS578FwUpdater#  ./JMS578FwUpdate -d /dev/sda -v
Bridge Firmware Version: v0.2.2.7

That is a much lower version number than for the JMS578 with v0.4.0.5

 

[tkaiser]

12 minutes ago, guidol said:

BUT the JMS567 has a Controller for USB Type-C and seems to have some addtitions to the JMS578

 

Huh? JMS567 is not JMS576. According to your debug output the one you're using is JMS578 (152d:0578 -- JMS567 would show up as 152d:0561 instead) so in case you're talking about an JMS576 then this chip would share same Product ID with JMS578. Can you please use your magnifier glass and check?

 

Wrt versions:

• Xunlong's NAS Expansion bay with JMS578 uses 0.4.0.4
• ROCK64 SATA cable with JMS578 uses 0.4.0.5
• Hardkernel's HC1 with JMS578 uses 0.1.0.5
• FriendlyELEC's NAS bay with JMS5xx uses 0.2.2.7
• Two older JMS567 lying here around use 46.3.0.2

For now I would assume JMicron is implementing a special numbering scheme where the 3rd value is not a version number but only the last. Will ask them later.

[guidol]

1 hour ago, tkaiser said:

 

Huh? JMS567 is not JMS576. According to your debug output the one you're using is JMS578 (152d:0578 -- JMS567 would show up as 152d:0561 instead) so in case you're talking about an JMS576 then this chip would share same Product ID with JMS578. Can you please use your magnifier glass and check?

Yes, the lsusb ID is "Bus 004 Device 002: ID 152d:0578 JMicron Technology Corp. / JMicron USA Technology Corp."

but IT IS a JMS567 like noted at the FriendlyElec-page for the NAS:
http://www.friendlyarm.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=192
 

And as attachment the proof as a picture

 

 

[tkaiser]

49 minutes ago, guidol said:

IT IS a JMS567 like noted at the FriendlyElec-page for the NAS

 

Nice, so your JMS567 appears as JMS578 on the USB bus and mine as JMS561. Can you extract the firmware please as shown in the 'NAS Expansion board' thread and provide it here? I want to reflash one of my JMS567 to JMS578 too

[guidol]

14 minutes ago, tkaiser said:

 

Nice, so your JMS567 appears as JMS578 on the USB bus and mine as JMS561. Can you extract the firmware please as shown in the 'NAS Expansion board' thread and provide it here? I want to reflash one of my JMS567 to JMS578 too

 

It wont let me backup without a firmware-upgrade

and I wont flash the Odroid v0.1.0.5 - maybe somewhat get ruined on my "new" NAS - to extract the v0.2.2.7

root@nanopineo22:/home/guido/jms/JMS578FwUpdater# ./JMS578FwUpdate -d /dev/sda -b ./backup_v0227.bin
Backup Firmware file name: ./backup_v0227.bin
Read Back to Backup Error!!
root@nanopineo22:/home/guido/jms/JMS578FwUpdater# ./JMS578FwUpdate -d /dev/sda -v -b ./backup_v0227.bin
Backup Firmware file name: ./backup_v0227.bin
Bridge Firmware Version: v0.2.2.7

root@nanopineo22:/home/guido/jms/JMS578FwUpdater# ls -l
total 560
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 519032 Nov  1 08:34 JMS578FwUpdate
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  50688 Nov  1 08:34 JMS578-v0.1.0.5.bin

So I did try - but failed to backup the firmware for you