2011/4/27 Willy Lambert <[email protected]> > > > 2011/4/27 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> > >> On 04/27/2011 05:08 PM, Willy Lambert wrote: >> > 2011/4/27 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> >> > >> >> On 04/27/2011 04:44 PM, Willy Lambert wrote: >> >>> 2011/4/27 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> >> >>> >> >>>> Hi Willy, >> >>>> >> >>>> On 04/27/2011 03:11 PM, Willy Lambert wrote: >> >>>>> 2011/4/27 Heinz-Jürgen Oertel <[email protected]> >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> Am Mittwoch, 27. April 2011, 13:56:10 schrieb Willy Lambert: >> >>>>>>> 2011/4/27 Willy Lambert <[email protected]<mailto: >> >>>>>> [email protected]>> >> >>>>>>> Hi all, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Hi, >> >>>>>> you did not mention that you have checked the >> >>>>>> IRQ jumpers on the PC104 board, but I'm sure you did. When you say >> >>>>>>> _ one PC104 CAN board with configured jumpers. >> >>>>>> I assume you are using this board first on the "old CPU board" >> >>>>>> next on the new CPU board without changing the jumpers. >> >>>>>> In this case, no idea. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> that's it, I did not touch anything on the PC104 stack. So the >> jumpers >> >>>> are >> >>>>> well configured in both cases. And I did the tests several times, >> they >> >>>> could >> >>>>> not have been disconnected by error. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I recheck my linux 2.6.35.7 .config files, and they are identicall >> on >> >>>> both >> >>>>> CPU boards. >> >>>> >> >>>> You said, the hardware is identical, same cpu, motherboard, etc., >> right? >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> everything is equal in term of reference (the 2 CPU board are the same >> >>> product with the same BIOS version,...). The only notable hardware >> >>> difference is the alimentation, but they both seems to be powered >> >> properly >> >>> (and the BIOS voltage values are correct, they are even better on the >> can >> >>> reticent board) and I have pluged a VGA cable on the working board (I >> >> don't >> >>> see why this could change anything on the can side) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> Do you see any diffenrence in the bootlog if you boot the same >> kernel? >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> what do you mean by bootlog ? /var/log/dmesg ? they are very similar, >> see >> >> >> >> Yes, the output of "dmesg". >> >> >> >>> the logs (the good CPU is alpha). >> >>> it is the same .config but compiled on 2 different machines as you can >> >> see. >> >> >> >> Hm, they are identical. I do not see any difference!? >> >> >> > >> > Aaaarg miss-copied ! Very sorry for this. See the good ones >> > There are few differences, but I don't see anything bad >> > >> > The working board alpha is out of any compartment, the faulty one beta >> is in >> > a "PC-Box". I may try to put alpha in the PC-Box at the place of beta >> but I >> > have 2 hours of dangerous mecanics I'd like to avoid. Nothing is >> connected >> > to the PC_box exept CAN, and all the connected wires where before on >> alpha >> > (and it used to work) >> >> On both I realized: >> >> pnp 00:0d: IRQ 11 override to edge, high >> >> Not sure if IRQ11 is a good choise. But don't aks me why it's working on >> one board. >> > > arg, here is the dmesg on IRQ 10 but it still doesn't want to speack on CAN > : > [...] >
Hi, I change my 2 board to put the working alpha in the pc-box and the non-working beta out ... guess what ... alpha is no more working, and beta works... The good news is that my software is good in some situations. The bad one is that I unconnected all the stuff that could make a difference The only difference in dmesg and interrupts where due to the PS2 keyboard that I have now connected. The last difference may be due to power supply (or electro-mag environnment ? just a close fan and wifi board ), but I overpowered it a bit...
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
