[Ovmsdev] Help me get my first data item on the I3
Michael Balzer
dexter at expeedo.de
Mon Dec 14 02:47:03 HKT 2020
Steve,
thanks for testing, glad it's working already. I'll do some more tests
to be sure it doesn't affect normal polling, and merge into the master
then. Probably not today though.
Regarding the missing replies, most vehicles need some sort of
diagnostic session to know they need to react to requests. That's
normally done with the request type VEHICLE_POLL_TYPE_OBDIISESSION
(0x10) plus a session type. There are a few standard session types, but
most vehicles use custom types you need to know.
Sessions expire, so the request needs to be sent e.g. once per minute.
But be aware that may lead to the vehicle staying awake indefinitely, so
it's usually a good idea to detect the vehicle state by something you
can determine without the need of a session.
As your CAN statistics showed lots of received frames before you started
transmitting some, it seems there are live data frames on the bus. I
suggest looking for a vehicle status indicator in those frames. The RE
toolkit is good for this.
Regards,
Michael
Am 13.12.20 um 19:15 schrieb Steve Davies:
> Hi,
>
> It seems to do what is expected - thanks, you are very fast!
>
> D (706161) vehicle: PollerSend(1): send [bus=0, type=22, pid=DDBC],
> expecting 6f107/607f1-607f1
> V (706161) canlog-monitor: 1607882591.310736 1T11 6F1 07 03 22 dd bc
> 00 00 00
>
> D (708161) vehicle: PollerSend(1): send [bus=0, type=22, pid=DD68],
> expecting 6f107/607f1-607f1
> V (708161) canlog-monitor: 1607882593.310901 1T11 6F1 07 03 22 dd 68
> 00 00 00
>
> But most times I don't get a reply.
>
> But not never - here's an example that worked:
>
> D (896161) vehicle: PollerSend(1): send [bus=0, type=22, pid=DDBC],
> expecting 6f107/607f1-607f1
> D (896211) vehicle: PollerReceive[607F1]: got OBD/UDS info 22(DDBC)
> code=78 (pending)
> D (896211) vehicle: PollerReceive[607F1]: process OBD/UDS response
> 22(DDBC) frm=0 len=2 off=0 rem=4
> D (896211) vehicle: PollerReceive[607F1]: process OBD/UDS response
> 22(DDBC) frm=1 len=4 off=2 rem=0
> D (896211) v-bmwi3: BMWI3: got SOC=86.7%
> D (897161) vehicle: PollerSend(1): send [bus=0, type=22, pid=DD68],
> expecting 6f107/607f1-607f1
> D (897211) vehicle: PollerReceive[607F1]: got OBD/UDS info 22(DD68)
> code=78 (pending)
> D (897211) vehicle: PollerReceive[607F1]: process OBD/UDS response
> 22(DD68) frm=0 len=2 off=0 rem=0
> D (897211) v-bmwi3: BMWI3: got Volts=388.77V
>
> The car is charging but otherwise "off" and locked. Perhaps that has
> something to do with the lack of replies.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 18:24, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de
> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> please try the poller rework I just pushed to the new
> "isotp-extadr" branch.
>
> These poll_pid_t records would define the example shown in the
> ELM327 manual:
>
> { 0x7b004, 0x7c0f1, VEHICLE_POLL_TYPE_OBDIISESSION, 0x81, {
> 20, 0, 0 }, 0, ISOTP_EXTADR },
> { 0x7b004, 0x7c0f1, VEHICLE_POLL_TYPE_OBDIIGROUP, 0xa2, { 30,
> 0, 0 }, 0, ISOTP_EXTADR },
>
> I've used these + matching faked rx frames to verify the
> implementation.
>
> Your SOC poll should look like this:
>
> { 0x6F107, 0x607F1, VEHICLE_POLL_TYPE_OBDIIEXTENDED, 0xDDBC,
> { 0, 10, 60 }, 0, ISOTP_EXTADR },
>
> …and your IncomingPollReply() should receive the reply with pid ==
> 0x607F1.
>
> Please report your results.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
>
> Am 13.12.20 um 11:33 schrieb Michael Balzer:
>> Steve,
>>
>> sorry, totally missed that. That's very unusual, haven't seen
>> that before. I first thought maybe that's using CAN extended
>> frame mode, but that's a totally different thing: it seems the i3
>> uses the *ISO-TP extended addressing scheme*.
>>
>> Quoting from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15765-2
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15765-2>
>>
>>> ISO-TP can be operated with its own addressing as
>>> so-called/Extended Addressing/or without address using only the
>>> CAN ID (so-called/Normal Addressing/). Extended addressing uses
>>> the first data byte of each frame as an additional element of
>>> the address, reducing the application payload by one byte.
>>
>> So it's standard frames, with just an additional byte inserted
>> before the protocol, used to extend the CAN ID.
>>
>> The OVMS poller doesn't support this yet.
>>
>> But it shouldn't be hard to add support for this, as it basically
>> just fills the first frame byte from the lower 8 bits of the TX
>> and RX IDs, reduces the payload size by one byte and shifts the
>> offsets by one. PollerSend() and PollerReceive() need to be
>> extended for this, and poll_pid_t needs to be extended by an
>> addressing scheme tag.
>>
>> I'll have a look. Tell me if you'd like to take care of this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 13.12.20 um 09:58 schrieb Steve Davies:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 17:28, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de
>>> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>> with log level verbose for canlog, you can simply activate
>>> CAN logging via:
>>>
>>> can log start monitor crtd
>>>
>>> …that will log all frames, if that's too much, add a filter
>>> like this:
>>>
>>> can log start monitor crtd 600-7ff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To see what was happening I had to "log level verbose
>>> canlog-monitor"
>>>
>>> I see this being transmitted:
>>>
>>> V (62436161) canlog-monitor: 1607847148.142477 1T11 6F1 03 22 dd
>>> bc 00 00 00 00
>>>
>>> There is no reply.
>>>
>>> The other app I looked at does this on the LM327 as setup before
>>> sending the request:
>>>
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.115 --> ATCEA07⏎ "extended address" 0x07
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.127 <-- OK⏎⏎>
>>>
>>> Looking at the LM327 data sheet this configures an "extended
>>> address" which is sent after the 0x6F1
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if that 0x03 in what OVMS is sending is that byte,
>>> and I need to somehow replace it wih 07, or if I have to get
>>> another inserted?
>>>
>>> Perhaps this is old hat to those more experienced than me.
>>>
>>> From the data sheet and the trace it seems I'm also responsible
>>> to customise the flow control messages :-
>>>
>>>
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.129 --> ATFCSH6F1⏎ Flow control header
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.141 <-- OK⏎⏎>
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.143 --> ATFCSD07300800⏎ Flow control data
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.156 <-- OK⏎⏎>
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.157 --> ATFCSM1⏎ Flow control mode
>>> 2020-11-15 10:34:35.170 <-- OK⏎⏎>
>>>
>>> I think that comes down to a flow control being "06 F1 07 30 08 00"
>>>
>>> Here's the page in the LM327 to help understand what it does:
>>>
>>> image.png
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com <mailto:OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com>
>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev <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 <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
> <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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20201213/025a6a53/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 316302 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20201213/025a6a53/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20201213/025a6a53/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the OvmsDev
mailing list