Messages in this thread | | | From | "Tomoya MORINAGA" <> | Date | Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:20:19 +0900 |
| |
On Friday, November 19, 2010 5:57 PM, wrote : > Could you please do the same testing while triggering a bus-off? After > the test, the output of "ip -d -s link" would be interesting as well.
I show the result below.
[root@localhost can]# ip -d -s link 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 2280 40 0 0 0 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 2280 40 0 0 0 0 2: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:40:26:c0:8a:31 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 10119825 10809 0 0 0 664 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 979543 6434 0 0 0 0 3: pan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN link/ether de:02:85:50:76:f6 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 0 0 0 0 0 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 0 0 0 0 0 0 8: can0: <NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP,ECHO> mtu 16 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 10 link/can can state ERROR-PASSIVE restart-ms 0 bitrate 125000 sample-point 0.875 tq 500 prop-seg 6 phase-seg1 7 phase-seg2 2 sjw 1 pch_can: tseg1 1..16 tseg2 1..8 sjw 1..4 brp 1..1024 brp-inc 1 clock 50000000 re-started bus-errors arbit-lost error-warn error-pass bus-off 0 156295 0 156284 156280 0 RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 1250360 156295 156295 0 0 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 0 0 0 0 0 0 [root@localhost can]#
------ Thanks,
Tomoya MORINAGA OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Wolfgang Grandegger" <wg@grandegger.com> To: "Tomoya MORINAGA" <tomoya-linux@dsn.okisemi.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>; "Wolfram Sang" <w.sang@pengutronix.de>; "Christian Pellegrin" <chripell@fsfe.org>; "Barry Song" <21cnbao@gmail.com>; "Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@linux.intel.com>; <socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de>; <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; <andrew.chih.howe.khor@intel.com>; <qi.wang@intel.com>; <margie.foster@intel.com>; <yong.y.wang@intel.com>; "Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@dsn.okisemi.com>; <kok.howg.ewe@intel.com>; <joel.clark@intel.com> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 5:57 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v2] can: Topcliff: PCH_CAN driver: Add Flow control,
> Hi Tomoya, > > On 11/19/2010 08:36 AM, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:16 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote : > > > >>> ......It seems the same line continues forever. > >> > >> Yes, it will continue until you connect the cable, that's normal > >> behavior. But that's not the full sequence. Could you please repeat the > >> test as shown below: > >> > >> First start the following command in a *separate* session. > >> # candump any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF" > >> > >> Then setup and start the CAN controller: > >> # ip link set can0 up type can bitrate 125000 > >> # cansend can0 123#deadbeef > >> > > > > I show the result of the above command below, > > > > [root@localhost can-utils]# candump any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 08 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 18 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 20 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 28 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 30 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 38 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 40 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 48 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 50 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000020 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 58 00 ERRORFRAME > > The above lines describe bus errors. Therefore it should be > > can0 20000088 [8] 00 00 80 19 00 00 58 00 ERRORFRAME > > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 60 00 ERRORFRAME > > The TX error counter has reached 96 signaling a can error state change > to "error warning". > > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 08 00 00 00 00 68 00 ERRORFRAME > > CAN_ERR_CRTL in the id and CAN_ERR_CRTL_TX_WARNING in data[1], but ... > > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 08 00 00 00 00 70 00 ERRORFRAME > > the state change should be signaled only *once*. > > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 08 00 00 00 00 78 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 80 00 ERRORFRAME > > "Error passive" state is reached and CAN_ERR_CRTL_TX_PASSIVE sould be > set in data[1], but CAN_ERR_CRTL_TX_WARNING should be removed. > > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 80 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 80 00 ERRORFRAME > > can0 20000024 [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 80 00 ERRORFRAME > > Sounds magic, well, I'm going to prepare a patch as soon as your pending > patch series is applied. > > Could you please do the same testing while triggering a bus-off? After > the test, the output of "ip -d -s link" would be interesting as well. > > Thanks, > > Wolfgang. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
| |