Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Extended Message Filter count in STM CAN API #15000

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 17, 2021

Conversation

SamuA-AP
Copy link
Contributor

As per STM32H7-series reference manuals:
"Up to 64 filter elements can be configured for 29-bit extended IDs."
This commit fixes a bug which prevented receiving CAN-messages
with extended IDs.

Summary of changes

Changed CAN Extended Message ID filter element count initialization value from 128 to 64 for TARGET_STM.

For example the reference manual for STM32H742, STM32H743/753 and STM32H750 chapter 56.4.22 states:

Up to 64 filter elements can be configured for 29-bit extended IDs.

Furthermore, in stm32h7xx_hal_fdcan.h line 113-114 variable ExtFiltersNbr declaration states:

This parameter must be a number between 0 and 64

This commit fixes a bug with the initialization value which previously prevented from receiving CAN messages with extended IDs.

Documentation

None


Pull request type

[X] Patch update (Bug fix / Target update / Docs update / Test update / Refactor)
[] Feature update (New feature / Functionality change / New API)
[] Major update (Breaking change E.g. Return code change / API behaviour change)

Test results

[] No Tests required for this change (E.g docs only update)
[X] Covered by existing mbed-os tests (Greentea or Unittest)
[] Tests / results supplied as part of this PR

As per STM32H7-series reference manuals:
"Up to 64 filter elements can be configured for 29-bit extended IDs."
This commit fixes a bug which prevented receiving CAN-messages
with extended IDs.
@ciarmcom ciarmcom added the release-type: patch Indentifies a PR as containing just a patch label Aug 13, 2021
@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

@SamuA-AP, thank you for your changes.
@ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Aug 16, 2021

CI started

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Aug 16, 2021

Jenkins CI Test : ❌ FAILED

Build Number: 1 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-cloud-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-cloud-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Aug 16, 2021

CI restarted

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Aug 16, 2021

Jenkins CI Test : ✔️ SUCCESS

Build Number: 2 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-cloud-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-cloud-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cmake-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test ✔️

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants