Re: CM-ITC, pch_can/c_can_pci, sendto() returning ENOBUFS

[Jacob Kroon <jacob.kroon@gmail.com>]

Hi Marc and Dario,

(CC:ing patch author Dario)

On 9/5/22 17:54, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 01.09.2022 11:38:31, Jacob Kroon wrote:
>> I used "candump can0 -l" on the EG20T host to capture the traffic, and
>> then connected an CAN USB analyzer to the network and used that to
>> capture the traffic. One thing sticks out. This is the log from the
>> CAN USB analyzer:
> 
> Who generates these CAN messages?
> 

The invalid frames in the logs are being sent from the the EG20T host, 
but some of them have also originated from the other nodes in the network.

>>> ...
>>> 505.7052;RX;0x464;3;0x01;0x01;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 505.7052;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 505.7063;RX;0x65;64;;;;;;;;;
> 
> As Oliver pointed out, this doesn't look like a valid CAN frame. Is the
> analyzer and/or sender configured for CAN-FD?
> 

No, none of the nodes in the network are sending CAN-FD frames, they are 
all normal CAN frames, max 8 bytes.

>>> 505.7662;RX;0x440;3;0x32;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 505.7912;RX;0x44C;3;0x35;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 505.9632;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 505.9632;RX;0x464;3;0x01;0x01;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 505.9752;RX;0x468;3;0x51;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.0362;RX;0x440;3;0x32;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.0622;RX;0x44C;3;0x35;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.2112;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 506.2112;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 506.2462;RX;0x468;3;0x51;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.3072;RX;0x440;3;0x32;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.3322;RX;0x44C;3;0x35;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 506.4572;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 506.4580;RX;0x464;3;0x00;0x00;0x00;;;;;;
>>> 506.5162;RX;0x468;3;0x51;0x20;0xFA;;;;;;
>>> 522.7203;RX;0x1E;1;0xFF;;;;;;;;
>>> ...
>>
>> Note the third message from the top. This is what "candump" on the host
>> logs:
>>
>>> ...
>>> (1662022485.638794) can0 464#010100
>>> (1662022485.638940) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022485.699405) can0 440#3220FA
>>> (1662022485.725166) can0 44C#3520FA
>>> (1662022485.896858) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022485.897382) can0 464#010100
>>> (1662022485.909042) can0 468#5120FA
>>> (1662022485.970036) can0 440#3220FA
>>> (1662022485.995596) can0 44C#3520FA
>>> (1662022486.144685) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022486.144768) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022486.179595) can0 468#5120FA
>>> (1662022486.240561) can0 440#3220FA
>>> (1662022486.266274) can0 44C#3520FA
>>> (1662022486.391248) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022486.391469) can0 464#000000
>>> (1662022486.450115) can0 468#5120FA
>>> (1662022502.662035) can0 01E#FF
>>> ...
>>
>> It fails to see the 3rd message from the previous log. What would that
>> indicate ? The CAN analyzer sees the message, but the EG20T doesn't.
> 
> Is this error somehow related to the "can0: can_put_echo_skb: BUG!
> echo_skb 0 is occupied"?
> 

Possibly.

What I do know is that if I revert commit:

"can: c_can: cache frames to operate as a true FIFO"
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=387da6bc7a826cc6d532b1c0002b7c7513238d5f

then everything looks good. I don't get any BUG messages, and the host 
has been running overnight without problems, so it seems to have fixed 
the network interface lockup as well.

Jacob