On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:23:42PM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > > Ira W. Snyder wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 08:55:16AM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > >>> Ira W. Snyder wrote: > > [snip] > >>>> Does this seem right? It seems pretty good to me. > >>> Yes, I'm just missing an error-passive message. What state does "ip -d > >>> link show can0" report. > >>> > >> Ok, here is what I did: > >> > >> $ ip link set can0 up type can bitrate 1000000 > >> $ ip link set can1 up type can bitrate 1000000 berr-reporting on > >> $ ip -d -s link > >> 5: can0: <NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP,ECHO> mtu 16 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN > >> qlen 10 > >> link/can > >> can state ERROR-ACTIVE (berr-counter tx 0 rx 0) restart-ms 0 > >> bitrate 1000000 sample-point 0.750 > >> tq 125 prop-seg 2 phase-seg1 3 phase-seg2 2 sjw 1 > >> janz-ican3: tseg1 1..16 tseg2 1..8 sjw 1..4 brp 1..64 brp-inc 1 > >> clock 8000000 > >> re-started bus-errors arbit-lost error-warn error-pass bus-off > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> 6: can1: <NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP,ECHO> mtu 16 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN > >> qlen 10 > >> link/can > >> can <BERR-REPORTING> state ERROR-ACTIVE (berr-counter tx 0 rx 0) > >> restart-ms 0 > >> bitrate 1000000 sample-point 0.750 > >> tq 125 prop-seg 2 phase-seg1 3 phase-seg2 2 sjw 1 > >> janz-ican3: tseg1 1..16 tseg2 1..8 sjw 1..4 brp 1..64 brp-inc 1 > >> clock 8000000 > >> re-started bus-errors arbit-lost error-warn error-pass bus-off > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns > >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 > >> > >> Now, in seperate windows, I ran cansequence and candump. I stopped > >> cansequence when it could not send any more packets (due to the cable > >> being unplugged). > >> > >> $ cansequence -v -e -p can0 > >> $ cansequence -v -e -p can1 > >> $ candump any,0~0,#FFFFFFFF > >> can0 20000004 [8] 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000004 [8] 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> can1 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME > >> > >> This last message is repeated lots more times. That's the flooding we're > >> avoiding with berr-reporting off. > >> > >> I see two types of messages here: > >> 1) bus error (only on can1) > >> 2) controller problems -- tx warning limit reached (both) > >> > >> Am I missing some message? My error frame generation was mostly copied > >> from the sja1000 driver. > > > > It seem that you are not getting the error passive interrupt even... > > Because you do not enable/handle it. CEVTIND_EPI seems to be missing: > > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.33/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000.c#L403 >
See the message I just sent. In short, the firmware coalesces the IRQ_EI and IRQ_EPI messages into CEVTIND_EI. You can only tell them apart via the rxerr and txerr registers. Ira _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
