[Ovmsdev] 3.2.008
Michael Balzer
dexter at expeedo.de
Fri Dec 13 20:32:49 HKT 2019
Mark,
I also recommend merging the SPIRAM fix into master now and building the factory release on that base as well (see my post Re: [Ovmsdev] Time for 3.2.006?).
I've been releasing all builds on my server including the fix since June, so there is no need for further tests.
Regards,
Michael
Am 13.12.19 um 09:35 schrieb Michael Balzer:
> Mark,
>
> having a look at Greg's new report now, which differs from the first. Please wait for my results.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
>
> Am 13.12.19 um 06:05 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>> Michael,
>>
>> It all looks good.
>>
>> I have tagged this as 3.2.008, and sent it to EAP. Plan is to send to MAIN this weekend.
>>
>> The rush is to avoid another of the new 8MB PSRAM users updating OTA and messed up their module. Any objections?
>>
>> Regards, Mark.
>>
>>> On 12 Dec 2019, at 6:12 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 2) You're right, the bug is tx_frame with null origin overwriting body.bus in the union. I didn't notice that when checking Marko's submission.
>>>
>>> tx_frame is a copy of the last frame given to the bus for transmission. The queue msg is gone when the TX done IRQ comes in, and Marko needed a copy of the
>>> frame the TX IRQ relates to. I asked him (see PR discussion), he checked and confirmed that all TX is done sequentially, so a single buffer is sufficient.
>>>
>>> Swapping the lines would work. The frame.origin also shouldn't be null, but the handler should tolerate that. …oops, tx_frame also doesn't get initialized
>>> in the canbus constructor, so there's also potentially garbage in tx_frame if due to some bug a TX IRQ is generated or processed without a previous tx.
>>>
>>> I'll do the fixes… and also rename tx_frame to m_tx_frame for consistency.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 12.12.19 um 01:20 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>> Two issues:
>>>>
>>>> _*1] A2L*_
>>>>
>>>> My a2l is this:
>>>>
>>>> #!/bin/bash
>>>> elf=3.2.007.ovms3.elf
>>>> for adr in $* ; do
>>>> if [[ "$adr" =~ "elf" ]] ; then
>>>> elf="$adr"
>>>> else
>>>> cmd+=" -ex 'l *$adr'"
>>>> fi
>>>> done
>>>> cmd+=" -ex 'q'"
>>>> echo "Using elf file: $elf"
>>>> echo "xtensa-esp32-elf-gdb -batch $elf $cmd"
>>>> eval xtensa-esp32-elf-gdb -batch $elf $cmd 2>/dev/null #| grep "^0x.* is in "
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When I run it, I get:
>>>>
>>>> $ a2l 3.2.007.ovms3.elf 0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40 0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90
>>>> Using elf file: 3.2.007.ovms3.elf
>>>> xtensa-esp32-elf-gdb -batch 3.2.007.ovms3.elf -ex 'l *0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40' -ex 'l *0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90' -ex ‘q'
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And a manual run gives:
>>>>
>>>> $ xtensa-esp32-elf-gdb -batch 3.2.007.ovms3.elf -ex 'l *0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40' -ex 'l *0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90' -ex 'q'
>>>> Junk at end of line specification.
>>>>
>>>> $ xtensa-esp32-elf-gdb 3.2.007.ovms3.elf
>>>> GNU gdb (crosstool-NG crosstool-ng-1.22.0-80-g6c4433a) 7.10
>>>> (gdb) l *0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40
>>>> Junk at end of line specification.
>>>> (gdb) l *0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90
>>>> (gdb) quit
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _*2] Frame origin*_
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the CAN_txcallback, I think you are correct. And both generators of that message set the frame correctly. So my initial thought was that it is
>>>> either a memory corruption, or somewhere else sending a frame with garbage data.
>>>>
>>>> I do see this technique used in both the mcp2515 and esp32can drivers:
>>>>
>>>> msg.body.bus = me;
>>>> msg.body.frame = me->tx_frame;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t normally just copy structures over like that. I memcpy() them, but I guess it must work. However, as our CAN_queue_msg_t is a union of CAN_frame_t
>>>> (frame, with first member of the structure a canbus*) and 'canbus* bus’, that is a little worrying. It seems that the msg.body.bus will get overwritten
>>>> with whatever is in msg.body.frame.origin. I can’t see anywhere that tx_frame.origin is set - which is scary because that would mean it is always random junk.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it works if tx_frame.origin is set to the bus before anything else, but not in Greg’s circumstances where something else arrives first. Perhaps
>>>> related to obd2ecu? I only see tx_frame set in can.cpp canbus::Write. I don’t really understand the tx_frame approach at all, and why the frame is just not
>>>> passed on the queue.
>>>>
>>>> // CAN Frame
>>>> // Note: Take care changing this structure, as it is a union with
>>>> // CAN_log_message_t and position of 'origin' is fixed.
>>>> struct CAN_frame_t
>>>> {
>>>> canbus* origin; // Origin of the frame
>>>> CanFrameCallback * callback; // Frame-specific callback. Is called when this frame is successfully sent (or sending failed)
>>>> CAN_FIR_t FIR; // Frame information record
>>>> uint32_t MsgID; // Message ID
>>>> union
>>>> {
>>>> uint8_t u8[8]; // Payload byte access
>>>> uint32_t u32[2]; // Payload u32 access (Att: little endian!)
>>>> uint64_t u64; // Payload u64 access (Att: little endian!)
>>>> } data;
>>>>
>>>> esp_err_t Write(canbus* bus=NULL, TickType_t maxqueuewait=0); // bus: NULL=origin
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> // CAN message
>>>> typedef struct
>>>> {
>>>> CAN_queue_type_t type;
>>>> union
>>>> {
>>>> CAN_frame_t frame; // CAN_frame
>>>> canbus* bus;
>>>> } body;
>>>> } CAN_queue_msg_t;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This approach seems to date back to the swcan support merge (f94ae5a1b).
>>>>
>>>> Should we swap around, and set the msg.body.bus after msg.body.frame? Or am I missing something…
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>
>>>>> On 12 Dec 2019, at 2:29 AM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> good example why not to use addr2line: I think that result is wrong. a2l uses gdb which gives:
>>>>>
>>>>> balzer at leela:~/esp/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/vehicle/OVMS.V3> a2l tmp/3.2.007.ovms3.elf 0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40 0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90
>>>>> Using elf file: tmp/3.2.007.ovms3.elf
>>>>> 0x400d5e4c is in CAN_rxtask(void*) (/home/openvehicles/build/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3.1/vehicle/OVMS.V3/components/can/src/can.cpp:730).
>>>>> 725 me->IncomingFrame(&msg.body.frame);
>>>>> 726 } while (loop);
>>>>> 727 break;
>>>>> 728 }
>>>>> 729 case CAN_txcallback:
>>>>> 730 msg.body.bus->TxCallback(&msg.body.frame, true);
>>>>> 731 break;
>>>>> 732 case CAN_txfailedcallback:
>>>>> 733 msg.body.bus->TxCallback(&msg.body.frame, false);
>>>>> 734 msg.body.bus->LogStatus(CAN_LogStatus_Error);
>>>>>
>>>>> …and that actually makes sense and matches the register dump.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I read the gdb disassembly correctly, A10 = msg.body.bus, so Greg's got a CAN_txcallback msg without a bus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hardening the rxtask against null here would probably avoid the crash, but I don't see yet how that could be possible.
>>>>> Both esp32can and mcp2515 set the bus field to their object addresses, which cannot be null.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 11.12.19 um 13:45 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
>>>>>> Can’t get a2l working at the moment. The addr2line gives:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> addr2line -e 3.2.007.ovms3.elf 0x400d5e4c:0x3ffc5c40 0x7ffffffd:0x3ffc5c90
>>>>>> /home/openvehicles/build/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3.1/vehicle/OVMS.V3/components/can/src/can.cpp:551
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> void canbus::LogInfo(CAN_log_type_t type, const char* text)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> MyCan.LogInfo(this, type, text); <—— HERE
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ELF is at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://api.openvehicles.com/firmware/ota/v3.2/main/3.2.007.ovms3.elf
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11 Dec 2019, at 5:20 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greg uses your build, the crash point seems to be consistent, can you post the a2l on this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS: Greg, would you mind switching to EAP to beta test future releases?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 11.12.19 um 04:33 schrieb Greg D.:
>>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, the module updated to 3.2.007 last night. I just checked on it,
>>>>>>>> and it appears that it didn't exactly survive. Crashed while running
>>>>>>>> the autoconfig script. Log with two cycles attached.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I tried renaming the /store/events directory to /store/was_events since
>>>>>>>> it seems like Duktape was getting in the way, but that didn't resolve
>>>>>>>> the crash. I manually enabled wifi so I could manage the module, and
>>>>>>>> moved it back to 3.2.005 from the other partition. Seems stable again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The car is going into the Service Center tomorrow (the perennial issue
>>>>>>>> with 1146 alerts), so I need to have the module stable so that I can
>>>>>>>> keep an eye on it. Going to leave it on 3.2.005 for now, unless someone
>>>>>>>> has a quick fix in the next few hours...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Otherwise, any ideas for troubleshooting after I get the car back back
>>>>>>>> (hopefully end of day)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
>>>>>>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com <mailto:OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com>
>>>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
>>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
>>>>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com <mailto:OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com>
>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
>>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OvmsDev mailing list
>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
> --
> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20191213/fee3e604/attachment.htm>
More information about the OvmsDev
mailing list