Hello, Am 02.09.20 um 05:16 schrieb Pankaj Bansal: > Hi Marc et al, > > I am running the canfdtest (can-utils-2020.02.04) on flexcan interface running in loopback mode: > > # ip link set can1 up type can bitrate 125000 loopback on > # canfdtest -v -g can1 > interface = can1, family = 29, type = 3, proto = 1 > Databyte 0 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 1 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 2 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 3 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 4 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 5 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 6 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > Databyte 7 mismatch ! > expected: 0077: [8] 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 > received: 0077: [8] 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 > > Test messages sent and received: 0 > Exiting... > > However when I run cangen, then the order of frames is fine: > > # candump can1 & > # cangen -n 100 can1 > can1 4B2 [6] 65 BD 28 6D 49 0A > can1 4B2 [6] 65 BD 28 6D 49 0A > can1 7FF [8] 8D 05 E2 50 B0 C0 8D 79 > can1 7FF [8] 8D 05 E2 50 B0 C0 8D 79 > can1 397 [0] > can1 397 [0] > can1 3A2 [0] > can1 3A2 [0] > can1 143 [8] 22 A1 C5 56 FF 24 15 3A > can1 143 [8] 22 A1 C5 56 FF 24 15 3A > can1 036 [8] 6D 5B 6C 6D E8 39 E6 5E > can1 036 [8] 6D 5B 6C 6D E8 39 E6 5E > can1 393 [0] > can1 393 [0] > can1 5FC [6] 42 CC F2 57 AE 22 > can1 5FC [6] 42 CC F2 57 AE 22 > can1 08C [7] F8 2C BD 6F 8B 98 53 > can1 08C [7] F8 2C BD 6F 8B 98 53 > can1 4E1 [5] 3C 59 E1 3D 78 > can1 4E1 [5] 3C 59 E1 3D 78 > can1 6D6 [6] 5D AF EF 06 78 EA > can1 6D6 [6] 5D AF EF 06 78 EA > can1 217 [7] 10 DB EC 26 5A F3 49 > can1 217 [7] 10 DB EC 26 5A F3 49 > can1 072 [2] 59 18 > can1 072 [2] 59 18 > can1 5BF [7] 91 BA 17 7F 52 F1 0D > can1 5BF [7] 91 BA 17 7F 52 F1 0D > can1 307 [2] C9 DA > can1 307 [2] C9 DA > can1 628 [8] B2 9B 31 26 B4 46 10 30 > can1 628 [8] B2 9B 31 26 B4 46 10 30 > can1 0B2 [8] 3F DF 63 74 94 6D 33 4B > can1 0B2 [8] 3F DF 63 74 94 6D 33 4B > can1 330 [8] 0C BE 31 4B 06 FA 5C 78 > can1 330 [8] 0C BE 31 4B 06 FA 5C 78 > can1 142 [8] 7E E4 3E 69 59 7B 28 64 > can1 142 [8] 7E E4 3E 69 59 7B 28 64 > can1 511 [8] B3 6E 72 1F 83 6D FF 3A > can1 511 [8] B3 6E 72 1F 83 6D FF 3A > can1 3C1 [8] 2C EE 30 5B 80 79 51 13 > can1 3C1 [8] 2C EE 30 5B 80 79 51 13 > can1 2D4 [8] D2 6A 5F 00 DB ED D4 38 > can1 2D4 [8] D2 6A 5F 00 DB ED D4 38 > can1 3F0 [8] DF 66 77 38 18 A2 1D 4D > can1 3F0 [8] DF 66 77 38 18 A2 1D 4D > > I am using the latest Linux-stable-rc kernel (v5.9-rc2). > > Is this known issue/limitation with canfdtest application ? canfdtest normally runs on the DUT *and* a the host. The DUT receives the messages from the host, increments the frame data bytes and then sends them back to the host. With "loopback" mode, the data bytes are not incremented and that's what you see above. Wolfgang
