Lpc2000

Is it correct, that the FullCANmode is not yet operational? When will
it be fixed? What will be the expected performance advantage of the
FullCANmode compared to the BasicCANmode?

Thanks, Klaus    
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "philips_apps" <philips_apps@y...>
wrote:
> 
> Andreas,
> 
> you are right and you are right. It seems somebody mixed up FallCAN 
> and extended identifiers and 29-bit identifiers are supported. For 
> sure the LPC229x and as well the single chip versions 21x9, 2194
they 
> are all using the same CAN interface and they all support 29-bit 
> indentifiers.  The filtering works perfectly for extended 
> identifiers. 
> 
> The mix up might be from the fact that even when the FullCAN mode 
> will be fixed, the FullCAN mode does not support 29-bit
identifiers, 
> only 11-bit.
> 
> A little bit more information about the difference between the 
> FullCAN mode and let's call it the gateway mode assuming a fully 
> functional FullCAN. 
> 
> If a message is received in FullCAN mode, it is transfered by an 
> internal statemachine (let's call it CAN-DMA) into the assigned 
> message object buffer. The other feature that is often assigned to 
> FullCAN, the filtering can also (even better) be done in the
gateway 
> mode. 
> 
> In the gateway mode, the CAN implementation offers up to 1024!! 
> filters for standard frames (11-bit identifiers) or up to 512
filters 
> for extended (29-bit) identifiers.  This is MUCH more than any 
> existing FullCAN implementation would allow.
> 
> Summary: you can filter for 29-bit, the filtering options in
gateway 
> mode outperform any existing FullCAN implementation but your
software 
> has to deal with the (filtered) messages you receive and move them
to 
> their final destination in memory otherwise they can be overwritten 
> by new incoming messages.
> 
> Hope this helps you and does not confuse too many of the others not 
> so familiar with CAN :-)
> 
> Robert 
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "alipowsky" <a.lipowsky@g...> wrote:
> > 
> > The following statement was given as response to a question via
> > Philips online support: 
> > 
> > "The attached errata lists the known bugs in the LPC2119.  Note
that
> > FullCAN mode is not operative. Hence the CAN module on our ARM7
> > doesn't currently support 29 bit identifier because Full CAN is
> > inoperative."
> > 
> > Did there somebody mix up the terms FULL-CAM and 29 Bit 
> identifier's??
> > 
> > Of course we use 29 Bit identifier in our actual LPC2292 project.
> > But we found a problem with global acceptance filtering:
> > We have a master sending frames to severall slaves and the slave
> > respond to this frames.
> > To reduce the interrupt overhead in the slaves, we use acceptance
> > filtering to filter all master frames, this is possible because we
> > defined one Identifier bit to be a direction Bit (0: Master => 
> Slave,
> >  1: Slave => Master)
> > 
> > Before we used exceptance filtering we got overflow errors,
because
> > every slave node also got the answer of all the other slave nodes.
> > 
> > When we use acceptance filtering we don't get this overflow
errors,
> > but now it happens that our LPC-2292 Node stops to generate
> > CAN-Interrupts at all !
> > 
> > Did anybody made comparable experiences with the CAN-Interrupts.
> > 
> > Andreas Lipowsky