Hi Oleg,

I'm glad you figured it out.

BR,

Alan

On 3/3/22, Oleg <ev.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> Thanks for the participation!
>
> In the end I've dug into the driver code and found the bug with CAN3 filter
> configuration.
> Here is the fix: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/5677
>
> ---
> With best regards, Oleg.
>
> чт, 24 февр. 2022 г. в 23:01, Alan Carvalho de Assis <acas...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Oleg,
>>
>> Did you try to find some typo or mistake related to CAN3 in the driver?
>>
>> Is it possible (at least for test) to use other pin for this signal? i.e.
>> PB3.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> On 2/24/22, Oleg <ev.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'm working with a custom board based on STM32F767 and a custom project
>> > fork of px4 based on NuttX-10.2.0. I can successfully configure and use
>> > CAN1 and CAN2 buses for sending and receiving messages, but when the
>> > CAN3
>> > bus is used, the board can only transmit messages, but not receive.
>> Simple
>> > app that I use for tests just waits in reading from /dev/can2 device.
>> >
>> > For all CANs the same CAN Bus transceiver is used. I've checked the
>> > hardware connection of CAN RX line and MC pin PA8, and I also
>> > definitely
>> > see data presence at an oscilloscope while data is being received by
>> > transceiver, so the issue should be on MC side.
>> >
>> > GPIO_CAN3_RX is defined to GPIO_CAN3_RX_1 (PA8) in board.h and in debug
>> > I've ensured that stm32_configgpio(GPIO_CAN3_RX) is called from
>> > stm32_caninitialize() on boot.
>> > The firmware should not use other alternative functions of PA8 anywhere
>> and
>> > I don't see any activity on the line if CAN bus is silent. But anyway
>> I've
>> > tried to disable Ethernet RMII from defconfing to make sure MCO1 is not
>> > used. It didn't help.
>> >
>> > I don't have any more ideas, maybe someone could help me with
>> > suggestions
>> > on what I should check to find the cause of my issue.
>> > Thanks in advance!
>> >
>> > ---
>> > With best regards, Oleg.
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to