[riot-devel] RIOT-OS on telosb, issue with default example

Ivano Calabrese alphaemmeo at gmail.com
Tue Oct 21 18:17:09 CEST 2014


Hi Thomas,
debugging the .../RIOT/boards/telosb/driver_cc2420.c  file, I have in void
cc2420_init_interrupts(void) the following values:
2014-10-21 17:02:55,338 - INFO # P1IN: x10
2014-10-21 17:02:55,340 - INFO # P1IFG: x10
2014-10-21 17:02:55,341 - INFO # P1IES: x29
2014-10-21 17:02:55,343 - INFO # P1IE: x09
2014-10-21 17:02:55,344 - INFO # P1SEL: x02
2014-10-21 17:02:55,347 - INFO # CC2420_FIFOP: x00
2014-10-21 17:02:55,349 - INFO # CC2420_GIO0: x00
2014-10-21 17:02:55,351 - INFO # CC2420_GIO1: x10
2014-10-21 17:02:55,354 - INFO # CC2420_SFD: x00

and these ones in interrupt(PORT1_VECTOR) __attribute__((naked))
cc2420_isr(void)
2014-10-21 17:04:06,609 - INFO # P1IN: x00
2014-10-21 17:04:06,610 - INFO # P1IFG: x18
2014-10-21 17:04:06,612 - INFO # P1IES: x29
2014-10-21 17:04:06,614 - INFO # P1IE: x09
2014-10-21 17:04:06,615 - INFO # P1SEL: x02

To receive a pkt, the msp430 needs a P1IFG=xxxx xxx1, didn't it?
I hope you have some suggestion :)

I also tried to change the FIFOP threshold from 127(max) to 20(cc2420
default value), but nothing.


____________________________________
*Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese

On 21 October 2014 10:08, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
> I'm using the linked toolchain in the RIOT-OS wiki (
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mspgcc/) [LTS-20120406].
>
> I don't know if this issue is related to the toolchain. Yesterday evening
> debugging the .../RIOT/boards/telosb/driver_cc2420.c  file, I notice that
> when a radio interrupt happens the if/else check hooks the the following
> code snippet:
> [...]
> /* GIO0 is falling => check if FIFOP is high, indicating an RXFIFO
> overflow */
> else if ((P1IFG & CC2420_GIO0_PIN) != 0) {
>     P1IFG &= ~CC2420_GIO0_PIN;
>     if (cc2420_get_fifop()) {
>         cc2420_rxoverflow_irq();
>         DEBUG("[CC2420] rxfifo overflow");
>     }
> }
> [...]
> but this is strange. Today I'm debugging this issue and if I find the
> solution I'll inform you.
>
> thanks a lot for the support.
>
> ____________________________________
> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>
> On 20 October 2014 18:03, Thomas Eichinger <thomas.eichinger at fu-berlin.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivano,
>>
>> just checked, my TelosB doesn't receive anything neither. As you
>> mentioned the ISR doesn't get triggered correctly.
>> I'm wondering what's the source of this as there were no recent changes
>> to this code.
>> As a start could you tell me your toolchain version you are using?
>> Will investigate this more in detail tomorrow and let you know of my
>> findings.
>>
>> Best, Thomas
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20 Oct 2014, at 15:54, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Thomas, hi folks.
>> currently seems the sent packages from a telosb (A) don't arrive to
>> telosb (B).
>> Using a sniffer 802.15.4 I can look the packets are correct but, although
>> I set the same pan id and the telosb (B) as monitor, I don't receive pkt.
>>
>> I tried to monitor the interrupt (PORT1_VECTOR) __attribute__ ((naked))
>> cc2420_isr(void) in .../RIOT/boards/telosb/driver_cc2420.c, but seems
>> the cc2420_isr(void) is never called.
>>
>> Do you have some hint to debug this issue?
>>
>> thanks a lot in advance
>>
>> ____________________________________
>> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
>> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>>
>> On 20 October 2014 09:37, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>> friday I solved the issue above. This morning before to sent you a mail,
>>> I notice you just fixed this problem.
>>> In a nutshell in my  .../RIOT/sys/shell/commands/sc_transceiver.c file
>>> there was not  p.frame.fcf.src_addr_m = IEEE_802154_SHORT_ADDR_M; line.
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot
>>>
>>> ____________________________________
>>> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
>>> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>>>
>>> On 17 October 2014 17:20, Thomas Eichinger <
>>> thomas.eichinger at fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Ivano,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for reporting this. I just opened a pull request [1] to fix the
>>>> `trans_p->data` artefact
>>>> and an update for the code used by `txtsnd`. Do you mind, testing this
>>>> with your TelosBs?
>>>> (I have mine currently not with me).
>>>>
>>>> Could you give me a pointer where `packet->frame.fcf.src_addr_m` is
>>>> fixed to 0x12?
>>>>
>>>> Anyways, if the problem persists, could you please open an github issue
>>>> for this?
>>>> Thanks in advance!
>>>>
>>>> Best, Thomas
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/1830
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 Oct 2014, at 16:18, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I installed RIOT-OS on a telosb and I began to discover the several
>>>> feature starting from the default example.
>>>> Using two telosb with the same program and different addr I'm not able
>>>> to sent/receive pkt through them. Using a sniffer I could watch the sent
>>>> packet has wrong fields.
>>>>
>>>> If I send a message in this way:
>>>> addr 2
>>>> txtsnd 1 hello
>>>>
>>>> I receive this pkt
>>>>
>>>>   0 No.     Time           Source                Destination
>>>> Protocol Length Info
>>>>   1       1 0.000000000    0x6c6c                0x0000
>>>>  IEEE 802.15.4 15     Reserved, Dst: 0x0000, Src: 0x6c6c
>>>>   2
>>>>   3 Frame 1: 15 bytes on wire (120 bits), 15 bytes captured (120 bits)
>>>> on interface 0
>>>>   4 IEEE 802.15.4 Reserved, Dst: 0x0000, Src: 0x6c6c
>>>>   5     Frame Control Field: Unknown (0x8806)
>>>>   6         .... .... .... .110 = Frame Type: Unknown (0x0006)
>>>>   7         .... .... .... 0... = Security Enabled: False
>>>>   8         .... .... ...0 .... = Frame Pending: False
>>>>   9         .... .... ..0. .... = Acknowledge Request: False
>>>>  10         .... .... .0.. .... = Intra-PAN: False
>>>>  11         .... 10.. .... .... = Destination Addressing Mode:
>>>> Short/16-bit (0x0002)
>>>>  12         ..00 .... .... .... = Frame Version: 0
>>>>  13         10.. .... .... .... = Source Addressing Mode: Short/16-bit
>>>> (0x0002)
>>>>  14     Sequence Number: 3
>>>>  15     Destination PAN: 0x6012
>>>>  16     Destination: 0x0000
>>>>  17     Source PAN: 0x6568
>>>>  18     Source: 0x6c6c
>>>>  19     FCS: 0xb59a (Correct)
>>>>  20 Data (2 bytes)
>>>>  23     Data: 6f00
>>>>  24     [Length: 2]
>>>>
>>>> where the hello payload is in Source PAN: 0x6568 (he), in Source:
>>>> 0x6c6c (ll) and in Data: 6f00 (o).
>>>> I noted that when I send a pkt the packet->frame.fcf.src_addr_m filed
>>>> (in driver/cc2420/cc2420_tx.c) is fixed to 0x12. In a nutshell when the
>>>> cc2420_send function is called, the check:
>>>> if (packet->frame.fcf.src_addr_m == 2)
>>>> ...
>>>> else if (packet->frame.fcf.src_addr_m == 3)
>>>> is never matched.
>>>>
>>>> ps. In the meant time I found a bug in  DEBUG("transceiver: Content:
>>>> %s\n", trans_p->data);
>>>> data field isn't define in ieee802154_packet_t trans_p struct.
>>>> ____________________________________
>>>> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
>>>> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> devel mailing list
>>>> devel at riot-os.org
>>>> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> devel mailing list
>>>> devel at riot-os.org
>>>> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at riot-os.org
>> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at riot-os.org
>> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.riot-os.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20141021/e834cdc3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the devel mailing list