| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:12:33 +0200
From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, mkl@...gutronix.de,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org
CC: linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, vksavl@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: add Renesas R-Car CAN driver
Hi Sergei,
On 10/18/2013 12:16 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 10/02/2013 10:09 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>
> Sorry for the belated reply -- was on vacations.
>
>> thanks for your contribution. The patch looks already quite good. Before
>> I find time for a detailed review could you please check error handling
>> and bus-off recovery by reporting the output of "$ candump -td -e
>> any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF" while sending messages to the device ...
>
>> 1. ... without cable connected
>
> Terminal 1:
>
> root@...0.0.101:/opt/can-utils# ./cangen -n 1 -g 1 can0
> root@...0.0.101:/opt/can-utils#
>
> Terminal 2:
>
> root@...0.0.101:/opt/can-utils# ./candump -td -e any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF
> (000.000000) can0 200000AC [8] 00 08 00 19 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{tx-error-warning}
> protocol-violation{{}{acknowledge-slot}}
> no-acknowledgement-on-tx
> bus-error
> (000.004496) can0 20000004 [8] 00 20 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{tx-error-passive}
>
> So we get and stay in error- passive state:
Looks good.
>
> root@...0.0.101:/opt/can-utils# ip -details link show can0
> 2: can0: <NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP,ECHO> mtu 16 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN
> qlen 10 link/can
> can state ERROR-PASSIVE (berr-counter tx 128 rx 0) restart-ms 0
> bitrate 297619 sample-point 0.714
Strange, what bitrate did you configure?
> tq 480 prop-seg 2 phase-seg1 2 phase-seg2 2 sjw 1
> rcar_can: tseg1 4..16 tseg2 2..8 sjw 1..4 brp 1..1024 brp-inc 1
> clock 49999999
Could you please try if the algorithm works better with 50000000.
> root@...0.0.101:/opt/can-utils#
>
> dmesg:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: bitrate error 0.7%
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus error interrupt:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: ACK Error
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
>
>> 2. ... with short-circuited CAN high and low and doing some time later
>> a manual recovery with "ip link set can0 type can restart"
>
> Now we have auto recovery only. Manual recovery was tested with the
> first driver version and worked.
What do you mean with "auto recovery"? Auto recovery by the hardware or
via "restart-ms <ms>"? How do you choose between "manual" and "auto"
recovery?
> Terminal 1:
>
> root@...0.0.104:/opt/can-utils# ./cangen -n 1 -g 1 can0
> root@...0.0.104:/opt/can-utils# ./cangen -n 1 -g 1 can0
> root@...0.0.104:/opt/can-utils# ./cangen -n 1 -g 1 can0
> root@...0.0.104:/opt/can-utils#
>
> Terminal 2:
>
> root@...0.0.104:/opt/can-utils# ./candump -td -e any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF
> (000.000000) can0 2000008C [8] 00 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
> protocol-violation{{tx-dominant-bit-error}{}}
> bus-error
> (000.021147) can0 20000144 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
> bus-off
> restarted-after-bus-off
Why does it get "restarted" directly after the bus-off?
> (011.738522) can0 2000008C [8] 00 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
What controller problem? data[1] is not set for some reasom.
> protocol-violation{{tx-dominant-bit-error}{}}
> bus-error
> (000.021163) can0 20000144 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
> bus-off
> restarted-after-bus-off
> (001.666625) can0 2000008C [8] 00 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
> protocol-violation{{tx-dominant-bit-error}{}}
> bus-error
> (000.021157) can0 20000144 [8] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ERRORFRAME
> controller-problem{}
> bus-off
> restarted-after-bus-off
>
> dmesg:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus error interrupt:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bit Error (dominant)
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
Why are they reported again. You are already in error passive.
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off entry interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: bus-off
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off recovery interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus error interrupt:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bit Error (dominant)
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off entry interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: bus-off
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off recovery interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus error interrupt:
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bit Error (dominant)
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error warning interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Error passive interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off entry interrupt
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: bus-off
> rcar_can rcar_can.0 can0: Bus-off recovery interrupt
>> I also wonder if the messages are always sent in order. You could use
>> the program "canfdtest" [1] from the can-utils for validation.
>
> This program is PITA. With the driver workaroung it works:
What workaround?
Wolfgang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists