From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Squires Subject: Re: socket can receive order Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 12:37:33 +0100 Message-ID: <55EEC87D.3030000@engineeredarts.co.uk> References: <55EEAD8D.3070603@engineeredarts.co.uk> <55EEB217.3080706@pengutronix.de> <55EEBB4E.6080104@engineeredarts.co.uk> <55EEC2BD.6010302@pengutronix.de> <55EEC3C0.1010002@engineeredarts.co.uk> <55EEC48A.6000705@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from engineeredarts.co.uk ([162.13.42.246]:59018 "EHLO mail.engineeredarts.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754142AbbIHLhg (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:37:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <55EEC48A.6000705@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Marc Kleine-Budde , linux-can@vger.kernel.org, Oliver Hartkopp On 08/09/15 12:20, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 09/08/2015 01:17 PM, Daniel Squires wrote: >>> The kernel module "produces" the CAN frames, so if you see them in the >>> correct order in wireshark, they have left the module in the right order. >> Sorry , I should have been clearer here, in wireshark was looking at the >> USB frames not the CAN frames. however I think what you say still stands >> due to the time stamps being in the correct order. > Thanks for the clarification. Can you have a look at the CAN interface > with wireshark, too? Wireshark shows the packets in the same order as candump, however it seems the timestamps are in the order wireshark got the packets, rather than when they were generated. A couple of other observations, it seems to take longer for an out of order packet ot happen whilst wireshark is capturing, and on one occasion my application saw an out of order packet which candump showed as being in the correct order! This is a first and I wonder if is also related to wireshark also capturing. > Marc > -- Dan Squires Engineered Arts Ltd.