* AW: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend
[not found] <FR2P281MB165556E4F729AC3CDB50F6F69F0A9@FR2P281MB1655.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
@ 2022-11-21 12:08 ` Marvin Ludersdorfer
2022-11-21 16:11 ` Andre Naujoks
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Marvin Ludersdorfer @ 2022-11-21 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-can
Hi,
I'm experiencing problems when trying to read out ECU parameters using istpsend when the response exceeds 8 bytes:
In one terminal, I run isotpdump -s 00000680 -d 00000780 -c -ta can0
In another terminal, I run echo 22 F1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 00000780 can0 -p 0x00
In the first terminal, I receive only the FF, but no FC frame is sent (expected is a 11-byte response).
If I turn around the communication direction and run isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 0000780 can0 -D 255, the target ECU answers correctly by sending the expected FC frame.
I would expect that isotpsend takes care of sending the FC frame in the first example as well to receive the full response - am I doing something wrong?
Any help would be highly appreciated!
Best regards,
Marvin Ludersdorfer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend
2022-11-21 12:08 ` AW: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend Marvin Ludersdorfer
@ 2022-11-21 16:11 ` Andre Naujoks
2022-11-21 16:45 ` Patrick Menschel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andre Naujoks @ 2022-11-21 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marvin Ludersdorfer, linux-can
Am 21.11.22 um 13:08 schrieb Marvin Ludersdorfer:
> Hi,
>
> I'm experiencing problems when trying to read out ECU parameters using istpsend when the response exceeds 8 bytes:
>
> In one terminal, I run isotpdump -s 00000680 -d 00000780 -c -ta can0
Use isotprecv instead of isotpdump. isotpsend just sends the 3 bytes,
you pass to it and then is done.
The FC should then be sent by the socket, which is opened by isotprecv.
E.g.
terminal 1: isotprecv -s 00000680 -d 00000780 vcan0 <anything else>
terminal 2: echo 22 f1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 00000780 vcan0
<anything else>
... your milage may vary though.
Regards
Andre
>
> In another terminal, I run echo 22 F1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 00000780 can0 -p 0x00
>
> In the first terminal, I receive only the FF, but no FC frame is sent (expected is a 11-byte response).
>
> If I turn around the communication direction and run isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 0000780 can0 -D 255, the target ECU answers correctly by sending the expected FC frame.
>
>
> I would expect that isotpsend takes care of sending the FC frame in the first example as well to receive the full response - am I doing something wrong?
>
> Any help would be highly appreciated!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marvin Ludersdorfer
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend
2022-11-21 16:11 ` Andre Naujoks
@ 2022-11-21 16:45 ` Patrick Menschel
2022-11-22 12:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Menschel @ 2022-11-21 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marvin Ludersdorfer; +Cc: linux-can, Andre Naujoks
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 297 bytes --]
Am 21.11.22 um 17:11 schrieb Andre Naujoks:
> Am 21.11.22 um 13:08 schrieb Marvin Ludersdorfer:
>>
>> In another terminal, I run echo 22 F1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d
>> 00000780 can0 -p 0x00
Typical error,
exchange -s and -d
isotprecv works the other way around.
--
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend
2022-11-21 16:45 ` Patrick Menschel
@ 2022-11-22 12:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2022-11-22 16:24 ` Marvin Ludersdorfer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Hartkopp @ 2022-11-22 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patrick Menschel, Marvin Ludersdorfer; +Cc: linux-can, Andre Naujoks
On 21.11.22 17:45, Patrick Menschel wrote:
> Am 21.11.22 um 17:11 schrieb Andre Naujoks:
>> Am 21.11.22 um 13:08 schrieb Marvin Ludersdorfer:
>>>
>>> In another terminal, I run echo 22 F1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d
>>> 00000780 can0 -p 0x00
>
> Typical error,
>
> exchange -s and -d
>
> isotprecv works the other way around.
>
:-D Yes. Trapped into this myself some times.
Btw. @Marvin are you really sure with the given values for the CAN IDs?
The help text says:
Usage: isotpsend [options] <CAN interface>
Options:
-s <can_id> (source can_id. Use 8 digits for extended IDs)
-d <can_id> (destination can_id. Use 8 digits for extended IDs)
So your IDs 00000680 and 00000780 are 29 bit CAN identifiers!
Is this intentionally?
Some people mix up the nominal values with the 11/29-bit IDs and think
every CAN ID below 0x800 is a 11 bit CAN ID.
Regards,
Oliver
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend
2022-11-22 12:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
@ 2022-11-22 16:24 ` Marvin Ludersdorfer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Marvin Ludersdorfer @ 2022-11-22 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oliver Hartkopp; +Cc: Patrick Menschel, linux-can, Andre Naujoks
Thanks to all three of you for the quick reply! I think I understand the problem now … will test it once I‘m back in the lab.
@Oliver: yes, use of 29 bit CAN IDs is intentional.
Regards,
Marvin
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 22.11.2022 um 13:58 schrieb Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>:
>
>
>
>> On 21.11.22 17:45, Patrick Menschel wrote:
>>> Am 21.11.22 um 17:11 schrieb Andre Naujoks:
>>> Am 21.11.22 um 13:08 schrieb Marvin Ludersdorfer:
>>>>
>>>> In another terminal, I run echo 22 F1 95 | isotpsend -s 00000680 -d 00000780 can0 -p 0x00
>> Typical error,
>> exchange -s and -d
>> isotprecv works the other way around.
>
> :-D Yes. Trapped into this myself some times.
>
> Btw. @Marvin are you really sure with the given values for the CAN IDs?
>
> The help text says:
>
> Usage: isotpsend [options] <CAN interface>
> Options:
> -s <can_id> (source can_id. Use 8 digits for extended IDs)
> -d <can_id> (destination can_id. Use 8 digits for extended IDs)
>
> So your IDs 00000680 and 00000780 are 29 bit CAN identifiers!
>
> Is this intentionally?
>
> Some people mix up the nominal values with the 11/29-bit IDs and think every CAN ID below 0x800 is a 11 bit CAN ID.
>
> Regards,
> Oliver
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-11-22 16:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <FR2P281MB165556E4F729AC3CDB50F6F69F0A9@FR2P281MB1655.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
2022-11-21 12:08 ` AW: Problem receiving > 8 byte UDS response when using istpsend Marvin Ludersdorfer
2022-11-21 16:11 ` Andre Naujoks
2022-11-21 16:45 ` Patrick Menschel
2022-11-22 12:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2022-11-22 16:24 ` Marvin Ludersdorfer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).