Re: [Xenomai-help] RE : State of implementation of CAN, CANOpen in Xenomai

[Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@domain.hid>]

Berruer Sébastien wrote:
> I'm on the first step of the project and I have to choose a complete
> system for my customer. I looking at the constraints both for hardware
> and software and the possibly dependency between them.

OK.

>> I'm asking for the current state of the CAN implementation. Is it a
>> partial or a
>> complete implementation of the CAN standard? What are the guarantee
>> about real
>> time latency?
> 
> What exactly do you mean with CAN standard? RT-Socket-CAN allows
> low-level access the CAN controller to send and receive messages, handle
> errors and set the bit-timing. Standard, extended and RTR frames are
> supported.
> 
> Sorry, I've made a misunderstood about the CAN organization. In fact,
> the RT-Socket-CAN is a kind of user API for ease the use of CAN bus,
> isn't it? It seems that, generally, the handling of protocol, like the
> access to media or arbitration, is done in the chip.

Yep.

>> I've read in "RTDM and applications" that there would be an effort for
>> implementing a CANOpen profile. But, the implementation of CANOpen
>> protocol is
>> let to users? I can't find any newer reference for that in sources or
> in the
>> documentation of Xenomai. What is the state of this project?
> 
> If you are looking for a free CANopen implementation, CANfestival might
> be an option, which also supports RT-Socket-CAN, IIRC. Check
> http://canfestival.org/ for further information.
> 
> My client asks for a complete implementation of the CANOpen protocol. I
> will take all a look at this site and if it's clear for that use.

Usually, only a sub-set of the CANopen protocol is implemented.

Wolfgang