On 01/22/2014 03:04 PM, Alexandre COFFIGNAL wrote:
Le 22/01/2014 14:30, Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
On 01/22/2014 02:27 PM, Alexandre COFFIGNAL wrote:
Le 22/01/2014 13:00, Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
On 01/22/2014 12:36 PM, Alexandre COFFIGNAL wrote:
+ cf->data[3]=((data0 >> 0) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[2]=((data0 >> 8) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[1]=((data0 >> 16) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[0]=((data0 >> 24) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[7]=((data1 >> 0) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[6]=((data1 >> 8) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[5]=((data1 >> 16) & 0xFF) ;
+ cf->data[4]=((data1 >> 24) & 0xFF) ;
rtcan flexcan works perfectly.
is anyone know what is the problem with first instructions ?
Probably mb->data does not have the right alignment. Could you not
arrange to get it properly aligned? Failing that, you should use
put_unaligned instead of open coding it.
here structures used in flexcan driver, it seem to be aligned
I am talking about the alignment of cf->data, since obviously, that is
the one which is causing problems.
Thank a lot, put_unaligned fix this issue if you want, i can send a path
The other solution (getting cf->data to be properly aligned) would be
more efficient, why is not it possible to get cf->data properly aligned?
I think, i can't get cf->data to be properly aligned because "cf" is
receive internal frame representation within the ring buffer
of a struct rtcan_socket and struct rtcan_rb_frame is a generic
structure used in all rtcan drivers .
Well, if you fix rtcan_rb_frame to be aligned, it will be aligned for
all drivers, so that looks like a worthwile improvement...
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai mailing list
Xenomai@xenomai.org
http://www.xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
