[etherlab-users] FMMU, notLRW problems

[Ezio DelBono]

Hello,
Can someone explain these two problems to me?

- FIRST PROBLEM -

With the command "ethercat -v salves" i have the following configuration...

=== Slave 0 ===
State: OP
Flag: +
Identity:
  Vendor Id:       0x000000f9
  Product code:    0x00040003
  Revision number: 0x00000068
  Serial number:   0xfda7da22
DL information:
  FMMU bit operation: yes
  Distributed clocks: yes, 32 bit
  DC system time transmission delay: 0 ns
Port  Type  Link  Loop    Signal  NextSlave  RxTime [ns]  Diff [ns]   
NextDc [ns]
   0  MII   up    open    yes             -   1221735596           
0           0
   1  MII   down  closed  no              -            -           
-           -
   2  N/A   down  closed  no              -            -           
-           -
   3  N/A   down  closed  no              -            -           
-           -
Mailboxes:
  Bootstrap RX: 0x0000/0, TX: 0x0000/0
  Standard  RX: 0x1000/128, TX: 0x1080/128
  Supported protocols: CoE
General:
  Group: Drives
  Image name:
  Order number:
  Device name: SM-EtherCAT (421)
  CoE details:
    Enable SDO: yes
    Enable SDO Info: yes
    Enable PDO Assign: yes
    Enable PDO Configuration: yes
    Enable Upload at startup: yes
    Enable SDO complete access: no
  Flags:
    Enable SafeOp: no
    Enable notLRW: yes
  Current consumption: 0 mA

The vendor of the slave says that:
/Just looking at the master log files, I've noticed one other potential 
problem: their master seems to think that we support FMMU bitwise 
operation. We do not support this and as such report it accordingly (our 
slave sets bit 0 of register address 0x08 to 1 on the slave, which means 
that FMMU bit operation is not supported). Has the master got the sense 
of this bit reversed, perhaps?
/
- SECOND PROBLEM -
In dmesg kernel log i have:
EtherCAT: Domain0: Logical address 0x00000000, 8 byte, expected working 
counter 3.
EtherCAT:   Datagram domain0-0: Logical offset 0x00000000, 8 byte, type LRW.

The vendor's answer:
/I can see a problem: In the file <dmesg.log>, line 24 seems to suggest 
that the Master is trying to use the LRW service, which, of course is 
not supported. The master seems to know that this not possible: the LRW 
command is not supported by our device. Can you ask to use LRD and LWR 
instead?

/Thank you, Regards
Ezio DelBono


v.Padana sup. 33c Molinetto di Mazzano (BS) 25080 -- Italy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.etherlab.org/pipermail/etherlab-users/attachments/20091116/2bcc3151/attachment-0002.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3724 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.etherlab.org/pipermail/etherlab-users/attachments/20091116/2bcc3151/attachment-0003.jpg>