<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Chris,<br>
<br>
there is no prepared branch for these changes, as we still try to
determine the best (most compatible) configuration.<br>
<br>
You need to apply the suggested changes manually to the current
master.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 20.01.25 um 19:56 schrieb Chris Box
via OvmsDev:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:010b01948512bad7-7b5654cd-0f4a-4ffa-8cb6-3ad27cb9ebe2-000000@eu-west-2.amazonses.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>I'm happy to try some new code on my Leaf. Which code should I
use? The current master, or a different branch? It wasn't clear
to me from the thread below.</p>
<p>Chris</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p id="reply-intro">On 2025-01-19 19:47, Derek Caudwell via
OvmsDev wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<div id="replybody1">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">I can't recall testing a later version but I
think Chris can confirm he was on a later version when his
Leaf had a similar problem.</div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
<div dir="auto">The Leaf is now my wife's daily drive so I
won't be able to take a look at making the suggested
changes for a couple of weeks at least.</div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
</div>
<div class="v1gmail_quote v1gmail_quote_container">
<div class="v1gmail_attr" dir="ltr">On Mon, 20 Jan 2025,
8:31 am Michael Balzer via OvmsDev, <<a
href="mailto:ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="v1gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0 0 0 .8ex; border-left: 1px #ccc solid; padding-left: 1ex;">Derek,<br>
<br>
<div>Am 03.05.24 um 12:53 schrieb Derek Caudwell via
OvmsDev:</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">When
running <strong>firmware </strong><span
style="color: #002200; font-family: ui-monospace,'Cascadia Mono','Segoe UI Mono',Hack,'Source Code Pro','Roboto Mono',Menlo,Monaco,Consolas,monospace; font-size: 13px;"><strong>3.3.004-74-gbd4e7196</strong>
on my Nissan Leaf I suspect (but can't be 100% sure as
it's only been 24h without fault) the new poller
caused the car to throw the attached faults from
overloading the can bus whilst driving. The fault was
sufficient to send the car into limp mode and could
not be driven until cleared with LeafSpy.</span></blockquote>
<br>
Build 3.3.004-74 (released 2024-04-30) did not yet include
the poller tracing control, i.e. it did lots of logging
for frames, significantly affecting overall performance.<br>
<br>
Poller tracing control was introduced in <a
href="https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/commit/7e4046042a99339d0212aac8f874cc8f780e634e"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/commit/7e4046042a99339d0212aac8f874cc8f780e634e</a>
on May 12.<br>
<br>
That commit was first included in build
3.3.004-103-g11fddbf6 released 2024-05-25. Do you remember
testing that build or a later one?<br>
<br>
<br>
But as I still don't understand how a software queue
overflow could cause a bus crash, I've also checked the
500 kbit timing for the MCP2515 and found that may have
the same issue as the 125 kbit timing:<br>
<br>
Our timing is:<br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"> case
CAN_SPEED_500KBPS:<br>
cnf1=0x00; cnf2=0xf0; cnf3=0x86;<br>
= PROP=1, PS1=7, PS2=7, SJW=1, Sample 3x @56.3%</span><br>
<br>
Remember, the SAE/CiA recommendation is SJW=2, Sample 1x
@87.5%. That would translate to:<br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"> PROP=5, PS1=8,
PS2=2, SJW=2, Sample 1x @87.5% =<br>
cnf1=0x40; cnf2=0xbc; cnf3=0x81;</span><br>
<br>
I also checked the Arduino MCP_CAN lib, and that uses:<br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"> cnf1=0x40;
cnf2=0xe5; cnf3=0x83;</span><br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"> = PROP=6, PS1=5,
PS2=4, SJW=2, Sample 3x @75%<br>
</span><br>
So our timing for 500 kbit/s on the MCP buses also isn't
as recommended.<br>
<br>
Derek, could you test the SAE/CiA recommendation and the
MCP_CAN config as shown? Or anyone else with a live
can2/can3 bus at 500 kbit?<br>
<br>
If these work, the question is which is the more general
setup we should adopt. Apparently the MCP_CAN lib also
does not follow the CiA recommendation, I wonder if the
MCP_CAN config is a compromise for compatibility.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"></span></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
OvmsDev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Am Rahmen 5 * D-58313 Herdecke
Fon 02330 9104094 * Handy 0176 20698926</pre>
</body>
</html>