Hello Oliver,
Hello Wolfgang

>>> B) Is it possible to label CAN packets in the similar way as done by
>>>    "--set-mark" in iptables?
>> 
>> ??? Need to look into the ideas there. Maybe i can go for that
tommorow.
>
> done :-)
>
> AFAICS a control message for marking CAN frames can be added to the
CAN stuff
> also.
> 
> E.g. A new SO_MARK control message for CAN could be handled in the
same way as
> described here:

So the "marker" can be read in the similar way as timestamp? And how do
I label
the message (assign "marker" to some message)?


> But just for curiosity ...
>
> Why do you think that you need to know whether a CAN frame was locally
> originated? It's a broadcast medium and the received frames on
userspace level
> reflect the traffic on the bus.
>
> Isn't the (uniquely defined) CAN-ID enough to know whether it was
originated
> from the local machine?


I thought, that mechanisms may be used for making the getting of
timestamp of
sent CAN messages secure against issues like message order and mixing up
the 
messages. I have already mentioned the message order issue in previous
mail.
Here is an example of what I mean by mixing messages up:
Imaging you want to request some CAN message by sending corresponding
RTR message.
In CANopen this is requesting PDO over RTR request. One PDO may have
several
consumer, so several CAN nodes may send CAN message with same ID and
data length
(by the way, this may happen also with LSS messages).
So, now we are sending RTR request for some PDO and want to make timeout
monitoring
on it. But, if another node (just another PDO consumer) will send
simultaneously 
exactly the same CAN message, we may get "alien" message before our own
is looped 
back.

This is why it is important to have per-message self reception flag. Or
the 
possibility to "mark" the message on transmission and then look for this
mark on 
reception to identify looped back messages exactly.

Probably one of the both mechanisms is enough. Probably mark approach is
better
and more universal (because per-message self reception flag is a kind of
special 
case of the marker; by marking with incrementing counter value you may
also 
directly address message order problem too). Probably having both of
them will 
give the developer more flexibility.


Regards,
Vladislav
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core

Reply via email to