Hi,

I am a little confused too cos the FCS check should be automatically done in 
the extended mode. 

The corrupted packet I noticed had an incorrect length (argument in Receive() 
event signalled in the app)  and also some of the data bytes were corrupted. I 
have not yet been able to capture another corrupted packet since.

 

Today, I noticed that I was losing a few packets, which I think was due to 
another Interrupt arrving from the RF230 (crcValid = ! radioIrq;). This however 
did not result in a corrupted packet. 

Is it possible that multiple packets arrivng in quick succession might cause 
data to get corrupted under some circumstances? 

 

Thanks,

Lewis

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Miklos Maroti
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:45 PM
To: Oldrine Lewis
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Tinyos-help] IRIS motes corrupted data received - CRC check

 

Hi Lewis,

 

In the extended mode (which the RF230DriverHwAckP uses) all packets

with an invalid CRC are discarded. The software ack driver

(RF230DriverLayerP) does not use the RX_CRC_VALID flag because it was

not present in the rev A of the chip. (Looking at the docs know I

cannot find a record of this fact, maybe it was there but

undocumented?) I am curious how you have seen corrupted messages. Can

you have specific examples? Do you see them with the softwareack

driver as well?

 

Miklos

 

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Oldrine Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,

> 

> I have a simple test where one node broadcasts packets and it is received by

> multiple nodes. I noticed that I was occassionally receiving some corrupted

> packets. The packets were transmitted correctly because one of the other

> nodes received the packet correctly.

> 

> On doing a little investigation, I noticed that the lower layer driver

> (RF230DriverHwAckP.nc)  does not check the RX_CRC_VALID flag in the register

> PHY_RSSI (0x06) which is updated with the result of the FCS check on the

> received packet.

> 

> 

> 

> Would adding another check improve the Receiver reliability?

> 

> 

> 

> Thanks,

> 

> Lewis

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Tinyos-help mailing list

> [email protected]

> https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help

_______________________________________________
Tinyos-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help

Reply via email to