Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] can: spi: hi311x: Add Holt HI-311x CAN driver

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Hello Akshay,

Am 16.03.2017 um 23:29 schrieb Akshay Bhat:
Hi Wolfgang,

On 03/16/2017 04:02 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:

Looks much better now! There are message for state changes to error
warning and passive. Just the following message is not correct:

 (000.200824)  can0  20000004   [8]  00 40 00 00 00 00 5F 19   ERRORFRAME
    controller-problem{}
    error-counter-tx-rx{{95}{25}}

Sorry, forgot to mention... the function can_change_state() [1]
should be used for that purpose, if possible. It fixes the issue
above as well.


The updated driver (the one used to create the above log) is using
can_change_state() function. data[1] 40 corresponds to
CAN_ERR_CRTL_ACTIVE, so looks correct? Could it be that the can-utils I
am using is old and not reporting state change?

Hm, yes. The raw data looks correct. You could download and build a recent version from "https://github.com/linux-can/can-utils"; to check. It could also be a bug.

Tentative v4 driver for reference:
http://pastebin.com/4xFVL1Sj

berr-reporting off case:
http://pastebin.com/fUn3j7qU

Ditto.

I just had another look to the manual and there is this undocumented
STATFE register at offset 0x1E. It's mentioned in some other parts of
the doc as interrupt enable register for STATF events. I would assume
the same bit layout than STATF. If you set bit 2 (BUSOFF), 3 (ERRP)
and 4 (ERRW), you may get interrupts. It's worth a try, I think. If
it works, it's the much better solution.


The HI-311x has a INT pin and a STAT pin. The hardware I have has only
the INT pin connected to the processor. If the STAT pin was also
connected, then like you mentioned it could be a much better solution to
use STAT for state changes.

OK, I understand.

Enabling BUSOFF/ERRP/ERRW bits in STATFE did not generate any interrupts
on the INT pin. Should we make it a requirement that both INT and STAT
pins need to be connected in hardware for the driver to do the error
reporting?

As I said, it's the better solution, especially if interrupt flooding does harm. How does your system behave when bus errors come in due to no cable connected?

So far using NAPI was mandatory. There is the problem of out-of-order message reception if handled in the isr on multi processor systems. Marc, what is the current policy?

Wolfgang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux