* 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).