did it work?
Can i have a copy pf the modifications?
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Miklos Maroti <mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>wrote:
> Thanks, I did not know. I have updated the git repo. Miklos
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Roadstar Runner
> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I used the broadcast address 0x000000000000FFFF since the 802.15.4 spec
> > specifies the boradcast address as 0xFFFF
> > I did not use the ULL postfix cos i was just using the lower 2 bytes of
> the
> > address
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Miklos Maroti <
> mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Is the broadcast address 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFULL? Miklos
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Roadstar Runner
> >> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> > Yes i would like to use the ActiveMessageC framework.
> >> > I hope that eventually a define in the makefile will upgrade the am
> >> > address
> >> > to a 64 bit version .
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Miklos Maroti
> >> > <mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Ok, I have started to look into this. Do you want to use the
> >> >> ActiveMessageC framework, right? How do you want to eventually handle
> >> >> the 64-bit address vs the 16-bit address defined in AM.h? Maybe we
> >> >> should change am_addr_t to 64-bit? Miklos
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Roadstar Runner
> >> >> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > So far no luck :-(
> >> >> > I was under the impression that this is all i should need. Are
> there
> >> >> > any
> >> >> > other quirks in the RF230 that might be causing a problem?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Miklos Maroti
> >> >> > <mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Looks good! Let me know if you run into problems. If it works,
> then
> >> >> >> I
> >> >> >> will merge it back to the mainline. Miklos
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Roadstar Runner
> >> >> >> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Hi Miklos,
> >> >> >> > Thanks for the quick response.
> >> >> >> > i made the following changes to support 64 bit addressing
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > /*************** File Ieee154PacketLayer.h*****************/
> >> >> >> > typedef nx_struct ieee154_header_t
> >> >> >> > {
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint16_t fcf;
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint8_t dsn;
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint16_t destpan;
> >> >> >> > #ifdef RF230_EXTENDED_ADDR_MODE
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint64_t dest;
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint64_t src;
> >> >> >> > #else
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint16_t dest;
> >> >> >> > nxle_uint16_t src;
> >> >> >> > #endif
> >> >> >> > } ieee154_header_t;
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > /**************************
> >> >> >> > Ieee154PacketLayerP.nc**********************/
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > enum
> >> >> >> > {
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_DATA_FRAME_MASK = (IEEE154_TYPE_MASK <<
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_FCF_FRAME_TYPE)
> >> >> >> > | (1 << IEEE154_FCF_INTRAPAN)
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_MASK << IEEE154_FCF_DEST_ADDR_MODE)
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_MASK << IEEE154_FCF_SRC_ADDR_MODE),
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_DATA_FRAME_VALUE = (IEEE154_TYPE_DATA <<
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_FCF_FRAME_TYPE)
> >> >> >> > | (1 << IEEE154_FCF_INTRAPAN)
> >> >> >> > #ifdef RF230_EXTENDED_ADDR_MODE
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_EXT << IEEE154_FCF_DEST_ADDR_MODE)
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_EXT << IEEE154_FCF_SRC_ADDR_MODE),
> >> >> >> > #else
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_SHORT << IEEE154_FCF_DEST_ADDR_MODE)
> >> >> >> > | (IEEE154_ADDR_SHORT << IEEE154_FCF_SRC_ADDR_MODE),
> >> >> >> > #endif
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_ACK_FRAME_LENGTH = 3, // includes the FCF,
> DSN
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_ACK_FRAME_MASK = (IEEE154_TYPE_MASK <<
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_FCF_FRAME_TYPE),
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_ACK_FRAME_VALUE = (IEEE154_TYPE_ACK <<
> >> >> >> > IEEE154_FCF_FRAME_TYPE),
> >> >> >> > };
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > /************************** RF230DriverHwAckP.nc
> >> >> >> > *******************************************/
> >> >> >> > temp = call ActiveMessageAddress.amAddress();
> >> >> >> > #ifdef RF230_EXTENDED_ADDR_MODE
> >> >> >> > writeRegister(RF230_IEEE_ADDR_0, temp);
> >> >> >> > writeRegister(RF230_IEEE_ADDR_1, temp >> 8);
> >> >> >> > #else
> >> >> >> > writeRegister(RF230_SHORT_ADDR_0, temp);
> >> >> >> > writeRegister(RF230_SHORT_ADDR_1, temp >>
> 8);
> >> >> >> > #endif
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Right now i am only using the lower 2 address bytes for testing.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> >> > Lou
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Miklos Maroti
> >> >> >> > <mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Hi Lou,
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Roadstar Runner
> >> >> >> >> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > Hi Miklos,
> >> >> >> >> > Thank you very much. I do not even get the interrupt from the
> >> >> >> >> > radio
> >> >> >> >> > if i
> >> >> >> >> > use
> >> >> >> >> > RX_AACK mode. If use the basic mode , it works fine.
> >> >> >> >> > I used a TI (CC2430) sniffer and was able to see teh messages
> >> >> >> >> > being.
> >> >> >> >> > The
> >> >> >> >> > data i included is from the sniffer.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > If i set the filter on the sniffer to 802.15.4 packets, it
> >> >> >> >> > shows
> >> >> >> >> > all
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > fields as i expect I have attached a screenshot of the
> sniffer
> >> >> >> >> > capture.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Does tinyos support 64bit 802.15.4 addressing at the
> hardware
> >> >> >> >> > level
> >> >> >> >> > ?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The current ActiveMessageC for the RF230 works only with 16-bit
> >> >> >> >> addresses, so that is the problem. You can try to hack every
> >> >> >> >> piece
> >> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> >> code to make it work, but that is not easy. If you decide to go
> >> >> >> >> ahead
> >> >> >> >> with that, then I can give some pointers. Basically, you want
> >> >> >> >> only
> >> >> >> >> 64-bit addresses, so no mixing should be allowed, otherwise the
> >> >> >> >> address of other fields in the packet need to be calculated
> >> >> >> >> dynamically.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Miklos
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Thanks once again,
> >> >> >> >> > Lou
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Miklos Maroti
> >> >> >> >> > <mmar...@math.u-szeged.hu>
> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> If you have serial working, then you can define
> >> >> >> >> >> RADIO_DEBUG_MESSAGES
> >> >> >> >> >> which will print out the received messages via the DiagMsg
> >> >> >> >> >> protocol.
> >> >> >> >> >> You should connect your mote to a PC, and there run the
> "java
> >> >> >> >> >> net.tinyos.utils.DiagMsg" application. Take a look at
> >> >> >> >> >> RF230DriverLayerP.nc line 677, you can also put some LED
> >> >> >> >> >> commands
> >> >> >> >> >> there the verify that you get messages. The RF230 does not
> do
> >> >> >> >> >> any
> >> >> >> >> >> hardware filtering, only the FCS (even snooping works, and
> CRC
> >> >> >> >> >> check
> >> >> >> >> >> is done in software). Miklos
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Roadstar Runner
> >> >> >> >> >> <redstripe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> > The data i had posted seems to have lost its formatting,
> so
> >> >> >> >> >> > i
> >> >> >> >> >> > am
> >> >> >> >> >> > re
> >> >> >> >> >> > posting
> >> >> >> >> >> > the raw data captured by the sniffer
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > 41 CC 11 22 00 FF FF 00 00 00 00 00 00 F8 00 00 00 00 00
> 00
> >> >> >> >> >> > 00
> >> >> >> >> >> > 3F
> >> >> >> >> >> > 08
> >> >> >> >> >> > 0B
> >> >> >> >> >> > 03
> >> >> >> >> >> > 00 F8 00 0F 10 00 AA 01 F8 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> >> >> > Tinyos-help mailing list
> >> >> >> >> >> > Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Tinyos-help mailing list
Tinyos-help@millennium.berkeley.edu
https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
