From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17228 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2013 16:22:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-bugs-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17185 invoked by uid 89); 2 Sep 2013 16:22:31 -0000 Received: from hagrid.ecoscentric.com (HELO mail.ecoscentric.com) (212.13.207.197) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 16:22:31 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail.ecoscentric.com Received: by mail.ecoscentric.com (Postfix, from userid 48) id CD9604680008; Mon, 2 Sep 2013 17:22:27 +0100 (BST) From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: unassigned@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1001897] lpc2xxx CAN driver improvements / enhancements Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 16:22:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: eCos X-Bugzilla-Component: Patches and contributions X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: sergei.gavrikov@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: low X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013/txt/msg00576.txt.bz2 Please do not reply to this email, use the link below. http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001897 --- Comment #4 from Sergei Gavrikov --- (In reply to comment #3) > So the hardware acts differently than the manual states. I could not > find anything in the errata sheets and I don't know if this also > happens for newer (i.e. LPC3xxx) devices - but for the LPC2294 > controller on the olimex board, this is reality. Because the > controller does not enter RM (Reset Mode) ... SYNOPSIS http://www.nxp.com/documents/application_note/AN10674.pdf | Fig. 14 May we presume that description from AN is not true for some LPC2294 revisions? Perhaps, http://www.nxp.com/documents/errata_sheet/2294.pdf See CAN.5 (pp. 11,12) "Normal operation cannot be resumed after reset". May we presume that they did not raise "Reset Mode" for "Bus Off" error as an early "workaround"? Though, I found no such reassurances on Net. On the other hand the driver uses lpc2xxx_enter_reset_mode() in a few places without (?) issue. Uwe, did you noticed any strange behaviors after this call? If you did not, then my guess is wrong. And if CAN.5 issue can be the reason then we can use your workaround by a condition is set according some CDL option. Sorry, I cannot help in testing any more due lack a CAN adapter. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.