question

solarflo avatar image
solarflo asked

Mac address on CAN interface

Hi,

I can't manage to have the CCGX and an Orion Jr BMS communicate trough VE.CAN.

I know it's possible, I have already done it with the same components.

The question is : is it normal to have a MAC address on the VE.can interface that is 00-00-00.....?

Output from ssh :

root@ccgx:~# ifconfig
can0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00
UP RUNNING NOARP MTU:16 Metric:1
RX packets:1978 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:659 overruns:0 carrier:659
collisions:0 txqueuelen:10
RX bytes:15824 (15.4 KiB) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
Interrupt:40

eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 04:A3:16:E6:1B:3F
inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::6a3:16ff:fee6:1b3f%lo/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1450 Metric:1
RX packets:549 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:2604 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:68619 (67.0 KiB) TX bytes:202783 (198.0 KiB)
Interrupt:83

lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1%1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:65536 Metric:1
RX packets:2678 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:2678 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:237896 (232.3 KiB) TX bytes:237896 (232.3 KiB)


In addition, the dmesg command keeps on giving this again ang again :


[ 223.836008] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): can0: link becomes ready
[ 224.776931] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: bus-off
[ 224.888482] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: setting CANBTC=0x10049
[ 224.888701] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): can0: link becomes ready
[ 225.830317] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: bus-off
[ 225.936262] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: setting CANBTC=0x10049
[ 225.936518] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): can0: link becomes ready
[ 226.881445] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: bus-off
[ 226.985439] ti_hecc 5c050000.can can0: setting CANBTC=0x10049

Thanks

BMSCCGX Color ControlVE.Can
2 |3000

Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 190.8 MiB each and 286.6 MiB total.

3 Answers
solarflo avatar image
solarflo answered ·

I've found that the "carrier" section of the ifconfig output should be zero or very low. In my case, it's quite high (659) for a setup that has been running only for a few minutes.

It means there's some trouble on the sine wave signal that is carrying the connection, so either the can chip of the CCGX or the can chip of the BMS are faulty... (I've also checked both devices are running at 500k)

2 |3000

Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 190.8 MiB each and 286.6 MiB total.

solarflo avatar image
solarflo answered ·

To answer my own question, obviously having only 00s as HWaddr for the can0 interface is normal (checked on a functional setup).

The second part is not normal though, with the messages "can0: link becomes ready" keeping on being logged... I've checked the cable, the wiring, the terminator plug... I'll try with another CCGX

2 |3000

Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 190.8 MiB each and 286.6 MiB total.

solarflo avatar image
solarflo answered ·

PROBLEM SOLVED : I've changed the cable, and it works perfectly well.

The cable is one end ethernet plug (CCGX side), and one end on a 20-or-so-pins connector on the BMS (two wires, no shielding).

What's weird, I've tested the faulty cable, each wire has a 0,2 Ohm resistance and none of them is cut. The only difference I see here, is that the "good" cable has twisted pairs. Might be the explanation. Anyway, obviously it can cause this behavior on the CCGX's VE.Can interface, with packets sent but none received, and lots of "carrier" errors.

2 |3000

Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 190.8 MiB each and 286.6 MiB total.

Related Resources