Hi Erik,

No as written somewhere in this thread I still loose some packets and I should use my system as a CAN logger (read: can't really accept dropped frames).
I only applied the patch I send earlier.


BR
Benny

Den 13-09-2010 14:55, Erik Calissendorff skrev:
Thanks Benny,

Did you manage to remove all the problem in your system? Did you do
anything else than applying the patch you attached earlier?


Kindest regards,

//Erik

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Benny B. Simonsen<[email protected]>  wrote:
  Den 12-09-2010 21:24, Erik Calissendorff skrev:
Hi we are having similar problem with our MCP2515 connected to a Gumstix
Overo.

Below is a dump from candump of packages when sending a burst of data
representing
"abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
with one character per packet.

  (1279702812.562408)  can0  1A300280  [1] 61
  (1279702812.568237)  can0    4  [8] 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00
  (1279702812.569458)  can0  1A300280  [1] 67
  (1279702812.571502)  can0  1A300280  [1] 68
  (1279702812.571594)  can0  1A300280  [1] 69
  (1279702812.571899)  can0  1A300280  [1] 6A
  (1279702812.577453)  can0    4  [8] 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00
  (1279702812.577575)  can0  1A300280  [1] 6F
  (1279702812.581634)  can0    4  [8] 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00
  (1279702812.581756)  can0  1A300280  [1] 73
  (1279702812.582397)  can0  1A300280  [1] 74
  (1279702812.583129)  can0  1A300280  [1] 75
  (1279702812.584869)  can0  1A300280  [1] 76
  (1279702812.585449)  can0  1A300280  [1] 77
  (1279702812.586273)  can0  1A300280  [1] 78
  (1279702812.587310)  can0  1A300280  [1] 79
  (1279702812.588348)  can0  1A300280  [1] 7A
  (1279702812.589599)  can0  1A300280  [1] 41
  (1279702812.590606)  can0  1A300280  [1] 42
  (1279702812.591613)  can0  1A300280  [1] 43
  (1279702812.592864)  can0  1A300280  [1] 44
  (1279702812.593780)  can0  1A300280  [1] 45
  (1279702812.594604)  can0  1A300280  [1] 46
  (1279702812.595825)  can0  1A300280  [1] 47
  (1279702812.596893)  can0  1A300280  [1] 48
  (1279702812.597930)  can0  1A300280  [1] 49
  (1279702812.599426)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4A
  (1279702812.600646)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4B
  (1279702812.600952)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4C
  (1279702812.602111)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4D
  (1279702812.603118)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4E
  (1279702812.604156)  can0  1A300280  [1] 4F
  (1279702812.605224)  can0  1A300280  [1] 50
  (1279702812.606658)  can0  1A300280  [1] 51
  (1279702812.607269)  can0  1A300280  [1] 52
  (1279702812.608459)  can0  1A300280  [1] 53
  (1279702812.609344)  can0  1A300280  [1] 54
  (1279702812.610992)  can0  1A300280  [1] 55
  (1279702812.611389)  can0  1A300280  [1] 56
  (1279702812.612487)  can0  1A300280  [1] 57
  (1279702812.613494)  can0  1A300280  [1] 58
  (1279702812.615020)  can0  1A300280  [1] 59
  (1279702812.616241)  can0  1A300280  [1] 5A
  (1279702812.616638)  can0  1A300280  [1] 30
  (1279702812.624145)  can0    4  [8] 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00
  (1279702812.624237)  can0  1A300280  [1] 37
  (1279702812.625061)  can0  1A300280  [1] 38
  (1279702812.625823)  can0  1A300280  [1] 39

As you can see we are getting a number of dropped frames with id 4,
unsure where these frames comes from.

I have applied the patch from Benny mentioned earlier in this thread
to the 2.6.35 kernel, and the result is better then before are now
seeing these id 4 frames.

Is there anything else that I should try?



Kindest regards,

//Erik

On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 6:48 AM, Michael Stocks
<[email protected]>    wrote:
Dear All,
I'm experiencing lost frames and id 0, 8 byte all zero packets now that
we have equipment sending back to back packets on a 250Kb network.
I have plenty of hardware attached to Gumstix Overos so I'll test your
patch once the kernel is rebuilt.

Cheers Mike.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of christian
pellegrin
Sent: Thursday, 2 September 2010 02:36
To: Benny B. Simonsen
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Socketcan-users] MCP 2515 RX problems

Hi, first of all sorry for the late response. Just now I managed to put
together the needed hardware (you know, in Italy it's near impossible to do
anything not related to holidays in august ;-) )

I had a quick look at your patch and it's similar to the one I prepared
and I'm attaching below. I think both of them solve the problem with out of
order frame. What is worrying me is that packet with all zeros. I never saw
something similar. I'll put my system on test during the next night to see
if I can reproduce it. I guess you put the code to reset RX flags in case of
error to try to solve this glitch, didn't you?

Anyway I will try your patch tomorrow.

diff --git a/drivers/net/can/mcp251x.c b/drivers/net/can/mcp251x.c index
177f2e1..e8c5e37 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/mcp251x.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/mcp251x.c
@@ -773,8 +773,9 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void
*dev_id)
        struct mcp251x_priv *priv = dev_id;
        struct spi_device *spi = priv->spi;
        struct net_device *net = priv->net;
+       u8 intf;
  #ifdef STATS
-       static int irqs, runs, ov0, ov1, rx0, rx1;
+       static int irqs, runs;
        static int ee[8], ii[8];
        static unsigned long last;
        unsigned long now;
@@ -788,7 +789,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void
*dev_id)
                now = jiffies;
                if (now>= last + HZ) {
                        last = now;
-                       printk("%lu: i %d r %d r0 %d r1 %d o0 %d o1 %d
err", now, irqs,
runs, rx0, rx1, ov0, ov1);
+                       printk("%lu: i %d r %d err", now, irqs, runs);
                        for(i = 0; i<    8; i++) {
                                printk(",%d", ee[i]);
                                ee[i] = 0;
@@ -799,24 +800,20 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void
*dev_id)
                                ii[i] = 0;
                        }
                        printk("\n");
-                       irqs = runs = rx0 = rx1 = ov0 = ov1 = 0;
+                       irqs = runs = 0;
                }
        }
        irqs += 1;
  #endif

        mutex_lock(&priv->mcp_lock);
-       while (!priv->force_quit) {
+       intf = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, CANINTF);
+       do {
                enum can_state new_state;
-               u8 intf = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, CANINTF);
-               u8 eflag;
+               u8 eflag = 0;
                int can_id = 0, data1 = 0;
  #ifdef STATS
                runs += 1;
-               if (intf&    CANINTF_RX0IF)
-                       rx0 += 1;
-               if (intf&    CANINTF_RX1IF)
-                       rx1 += 1;
                {
                        int i;
                        for(i = 0; i<    8; i++) {
@@ -828,25 +825,31 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void
*dev_id)

                if (intf&    CANINTF_RX0IF) {
                        mcp251x_hw_rx(spi, 0);
-                       /* Free one buffer ASAP */
-                       mcp251x_write_bits(spi, CANINTF, intf&
  CANINTF_RX0IF,
-                                          0x00);
+
+                       /* check that a packet didn't come while emptying
RX0 */
+                       if ((intf&    CANINTF_RX1IF) == 0)
+                               intf |= mcp251x_read_reg(spi, CANINTF);
                }

                if (intf&    CANINTF_RX1IF)
                        mcp251x_hw_rx(spi, 1);

+               /* This is needed to close a race condition that causes
+                * packet reordening: we must assure that we never empty
+                * RX0 but not RX1. If this happens the next packet will
+                * land in RX0. As a conseuqence on the next do { } while
+                * spin we will have packets out of order.
+                */
+               intf |= CANINTF_RX1IF;
+
                mcp251x_write_bits(spi, CANINTF, intf, 0x00);

-               eflag = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, EFLG);
-               mcp251x_write_reg(spi, EFLG, 0x00);
+               if (intf&&    CANINTF_ERRIF) {
+                       eflag = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, EFLG);
+                       mcp251x_write_reg(spi, EFLG, 0x00);
+               }

  #ifdef STATS
-               if (eflag&    EFLG_RX0OVR)
-                       ov0 += 1;
-
-               if (eflag&    EFLG_RX1OVR)
-                       ov1 += 1;
                {
                        int i;
                        for(i = 0; i<    8; i++) {
@@ -924,9 +927,6 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void
*dev_id)
                        }
                }

-               if (intf == 0)
-                       break;
-
                if (intf&    (CANINTF_TX2IF | CANINTF_TX1IF |
CANINTF_TX0IF)) {
                        net->stats.tx_packets++;
                        net->stats.tx_bytes += priv->tx_len - 1; @@ -936,7
+936,8 @@ static irqreturn_t mcp251x_can_ist(int irq, void *dev_id)
                        }
                        netif_wake_queue(net);
                }
-       }
+               intf = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, CANINTF);
+       } while (!priv->force_quit&&    intf);
        mutex_unlock(&priv->mcp_lock);
        return IRQ_HANDLED;
  }



On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Benny B. Simonsen<[email protected]>
  wrote:
2010/8/6 christian pellegrin<[email protected]>
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger
<[email protected]>
wrote:
To be clear, out-of-order messages are also not OK.
Yes I was looking at this with some interleave analysis. I think the
problem lies in the following race:

// suppose we come here with RXB0 filled with packet X
                u8 intf = mcp251x_read_reg(spi, CANINTF);
                u8 eflag;
                int can_id = 0, data1 = 0;

// packet X+1 arrives and lands in RXB1

                if (intf&    CANINTF_RX0IF) {
                        mcp251x_hw_rx(spi, 0);
                        /* Free one buffer ASAP */
                        mcp251x_write_bits(spi, CANINTF, intf&
CANINTF_RX0IF,
                                           0x00);
                }

// packet X+2 arrives and lands in RXB0 // unfortunately variable
intf is old and doesn't show that we have something in RXB1 // (*1)
                if (intf&    CANINTF_RX1IF)
                        mcp251x_hw_rx(spi, 1);

now on the next turn we will have packet X+2 in RXB0 and X+1 in RXB1
so we read them out-of-order. The easiest way to solve the problem is
to take out the line:

                        /* Free one buffer ASAP */
                        mcp251x_write_bits(spi, CANINTF, intf&
CANINTF_RX0IF,
                                           0x00);

but we risk to lose more packets. Perhaps also rereading intf in (*1)
could work but we must be careful when we reset CANINTF register to
not lose an interrupt for RXB0. I will do some tests but after next
week because I don't have the access to the hardware until then.

--
Christian Pellegrin, see http://www.evolware.org/chri/ "Real
Programmers don't play tennis, or any other sport which requires you
to change clothes. Mountain climbing is OK, and Real Programmers wear
their climbing boots to work in case a mountain should suddenly
spring up in the middle of the computer room."
Hi Christian,
Did you have a chance to look on the problem and / or the patch I send
to the list?
BR
Benny

--
Christian Pellegrin, see http://www.evolware.org/chri/ "Real Programmers
don't play tennis, or any other sport which requires you to change clothes.
Mountain climbing is OK, and Real Programmers wear their climbing boots to
work in case a mountain should suddenly spring up in the middle of the
computer room."
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users

_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
Hi Erik,

The 0x04 ID message is the way SocketCAN indicates overrun. Don't know where
the different error codes is described (saw it in the driver)

BR
Benny



_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users

Reply via email to