Hi Stephen, I have pushed support for RTU to the branch feature/modbusrtu, it seems to work. I've only used RTU over TCP using the connection string modbus-rtu:tcp://127.0.0.1:502. There is also a few things to update docs, test and refactoring.
Until it gets merged into the develop branch it won't appear in the 0.9.0-SNAPSHOT so you'll have to build the feature/modbusrtu branch using maven. Once you have built it then it will get stored in your maven repository cache as the 0.9.0-SNAPSHOT As you are looking at contributing you should take a look at https://plc4x.apache.org/developers/contributing.html This gives you an overview of how to fork the main repository and keep it up to date. Once you have it forked then you should be able to update your copy and push the changes to your fork. This should then request you to create a PR (You can change it to push to the feature/modbusrtu branch on the main repository) which we can review. A simple change if you want to test it would be to add a Modbus RTU ascii doc to the folder src/site/asciidoc/users/protocols folder based on the existing Modbus TCP page. There's plenty of people activate that are generally more than happy to help if you have any questions Ben On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:45 PM Stephen Snow <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > On Tue, 2021-08-17 at 06:50 +1000, Ben Hutcheson wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > > > Thank you for the offer and if it's ok I'll certainly take you up on > > it. > > > Sure, what snapshot should I point maven to? Currently I have 0.8.0 > that I was playing with a bit yesterday. > > > Next week I'll be starting a new job so I won't be contributing for a > > while, However I'll try and get something up and running this week. > > If you > > are able to test it and/or take over the implementation from there it > > would > > be great. > Should I fork the repo? Where do I look for the directions on PR's > etc...? > > Stephen > > > > > Ben > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 4:25 AM Stephen Snow <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I'd be more than willing to setup some equipment for a lab to test > > > with. Readily available to me are a couple of Omron CP1-H CPU's and > > > a > > > Red Lion G3800C (which is outdated, but communicates with > > > everything > > > ootb), plus I can easily get some Modicon stuff as well. The Omrons > > > are > > > fitted with serial ports capable of communicating RS-485 in modbus > > > RTU, > > > and the RLC HMI can talk Modbus TCP as well, so that is without > > > laying > > > my hands on some Modicon equipment. > > > > > > Let me know, and I can start pretty much as soon as I clear space > > > on my > > > lab bench for the setup. > > > > > > Stephen > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2021-08-16 at 11:44 +0000, Christofer Dutz wrote: > > > > Hi Stephen, > > > > > > > > it's not that we're dropping anything ... it's just that we > > > > haven't > > > > put any work into creating such a driver. Some day, if someone > > > > stumbles over PLC4X with the need to use ASCII, we might > > > > implement it > > > > for them (Mabe as a paid-gig or not). > > > > > > > > In the inital days of PLC4X I invested a huge amount of time into > > > > thinking what the industry could need ... I switched to the way > > > > more > > > > healthy mode of implementing was is actually needed and when it's > > > > needed. > > > > > > > > But I agree ... Modbus TCP, Modbus RTU (over RS or TCP) are > > > > definitely flavors we should be supporting. > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > > Von: Stephen Snow <[email protected]> > > > > Gesendet: Montag, 16. August 2021 13:39 > > > > An: [email protected] > > > > Betreff: Re: Modbus RTU > > > > > > > > So I use modbus in all it's flavours, including modbusRTU and > > > > Modbus > > > > TCP. And the newer flavours Modicon is using now. Modbus RTU is > > > > definitely in heavy use on industrial equipment I encounter. It > > > > is > > > > commonly a drive networking choice, and a HMI networking choice. > > > > So, > > > > depending on what is using it ASCII is likely needed too. The one > > > > thing you don't want to do is drop ASCII. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Stephen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2021-08-15 at 23:48 +0200, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > > > > On 2021-08-15 22:40, Łukasz Dywicki wrote: > > > > > > Then each driver flavor of modbus (rtu, ascii, tcp) would > > > > > > simply > > > > > > need to wrap and unwrap structures coming from an transport. > > > > > > > > > > seeing the ascii variant since the 1980s or early 1990s. IIUIC, > > > > > it > > > > > was > > > > > mostly used for hand terminals, and not to connect to > > > > > computers. > > > > > So I wouldn't spend time on that, unless nothing else is > > > > > around. > > > > > > > > > > I haven't checked the mspec in details, but I suspect it is > > > > > close > > > > > to > > > > > fair amount of equipment has extensions that are not in the > > > > > specification (well, at least last time I read it about 20 > > > > > years > > > > > ago), > > > > > namely floating point numbers and 32/64-bit integers. It would > > > > > be > > > > > neat > > > > > to support that... > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, I don't have cycles to help out with it. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > Niclas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
