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

Ivano Calabrese alphaemmeo at gmail.com
Fri Oct 24 15:39:33 CEST 2014


Hi Thomas,
thanks a lot for your reply and availability, it was very useful.

Good luck for your demo ;).

Cheers,

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

On 22 October 2014 20:08, Thomas Eichinger <thomas.eichinger at fu-berlin.de>
wrote:

> Hi Ivano,
>
> sorry we couldn’t solve this problem in the meanwhile. We have a demo in
> beginning
> of November and most core devs are currently very busy preparing for this.
> Coming to your question, I’ll first cite Oleg’s answer to a similar
> question on the users
> mailing list:
>
> Actually, in the past it turned out to be difficult finding widely
> available
> and not too expensive Cortex driven platforms with a radio chip.
> Fortunately,
> it seems that the situation is slowly improving with some new boards
> popping
> up on the market to fill this gap.
>
> Currently we're mostly focusing on support for the IoT-Lab M3 nodes [1][2]
> which are used in the FIT IoT-LAB [3]. Although these nodes are only
> available
> as part of the testbed, the IoT-Lab provides open remote access. Otherwise,
> you might consider using the HikoB Fox [4] which is very similar to the
> IoT-Lab hardware. If you work for some company, you can purchase these
> boards
> from HikoB.
>
> We have also preliminary support for the Atmel SAM R21 [5] which also
> features
> the same radio transceiver. A more functional support for this platform may
> become available in December.
>
>
> Additionally there is the Zolertia Z1 [6] somehow a successor to the
> TelosB with
> very similar hardware. The RIOT port for this works (yes even receiving
> :)) and
> got a lot of attention lately.
>
> Also there are new ports emerging for boards running a TI CC2538 (OpenMote
> [8] and
> cc2538dk [7]) while currently in an early stage these got some traction
> lately.
>
> I can’t give you an explicit recommendation because I don’t know your
> project
> needs and timeframe. If you want we could also discuss this off-list.
>
> Hope this helps somehow.
>
> Best, Thomas
>
> [1] https://www.iot-lab.info/hardware/m3/
> [2] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/wiki/Board%3A-IoT-LAB_M3
> [3] https://www.iot-lab.info/
> [4]
> http://www.hikob.com/assets/uploads/2014/07/HIKOB_FOX_ProductSheet_EN.pdf
> [5] http://www.atmel.com/tools/atsamr21-xpro.aspx
> [6] http://www.zolertia.com/ti
> [7] http://www.ti.com/tool/cc2538dk
> [8] http://www.openmote.com/openmote-cc2538/
>
> On 22 Oct 2014, at 17:30, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Thomas, hi folks.
> it seems I don't find a solution to this issue. Since I believe that
> RIOT-OS is a good OS and I need a board with 802.15.4 link layer, can you
> suggest me which board is really compatible with RIOT-OS. Of sure I'll come
> back on this issue but now I need to go along on my project.
>
> Thanks a lot guys.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________
> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>
> On 22 October 2014 12:18, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>> I tried to set monitor 1(on telosb_A) but I didn't obtain success. After
>> you remind me to use monitor 1 command, I tried again. Now having some
>> print debugs I can look that if I set monitor to 1 (on telosb_A), the
>> msp430 doesn't receive interrupt signal. Come back to monitor 0, the
>> telosb_A restart to receive only after a new transmission (from telosb_A to
>> telosb_B).
>>
>> the same happen if I change A with B.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> ____________________________________
>> *Ivano Calabrese*, MSc.
>> http://www.dei.unipd.it/~icalabre/
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/ivanocalabrese
>>
>> On 22 October 2014 11:25, Thomas Eichinger <thomas.eichinger at fu-berlin.de
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ivano,
>>>
>>> could you check if it is the same situation if you set the receiving
>>> node into
>>> promiscuous mode using the shell command
>>>
>>> monitor 1
>>>
>>> Reading the cc2420 spec FIFOP should rise independently of the threshold
>>> if a
>>> valid packet is received.
>>>
>>> cc2420 data sheet p. 33
>>> > When address recognition is enabled the FIFOP pin will remain
>>> inactive
>>> > until the incoming frame passes address recognition, even if the
>>> number
>>> > of bytes in the RXFIFO exceeds the programmed threshold.
>>>
>>> Maybe the address encoding in the default example does not match the
>>> cc2420’s decoding rules.
>>>
>>> Best, Thomas
>>>
>>> On 21 Oct 2014, at 18:17, Ivano Calabrese <alphaemmeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20141024/8af2bd33/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the devel mailing list