I'm trying to build a raw data with ethernet frame via C code.
I built a packet (included Ethernet->IP->UDP->DHCP protocols) and sent it via the WiFi interface. I followed it via the Wireshark which prints out:
Ethernet2 -> Frame Check Sequence -> Incorrect, should be XXX.
I did not build an FCS data in my packet, I left the field blank.
Now, I can't find any simple function/code in C which does that. All the codes I found gave me a bad output.
Someone done it before and can share how to implement the FCS in the Ethernet packet?
Thank you in advance
FIX: it seems that FCS calculation is only optional, I added the IP checksum calculation instead and that was enough for the DHCP to pass.
Thanks.
try:
#define BYTE unsigned char
int fcs(BYTE* paquete,int n){
int byte,sum=0;
n++;
for(int j=0;j<=n;j++){
byte=paquete[j];
for(int i=0;i<8;i++){
if(j!=n && i<7){
sum = sum+(byte & 0x01);
byte = byte >> 1;
}
}
}
return sum;
}
Related
it's the first time I see something like this. I'm starting to suspect it's a hardware fault.
whenever I try to send the contents of array "test" and that array is larger than 4 elements or I initialize all elements in the declaration it contains 0xff instead of values I try to initialise with.
this works fine. when I read values from the array in while(sending them to the lcd and uart) both readouts are consistent with test values:
uint8_t i=0;
uint8_t test[4] = {1,2,3,4};
while(i<5){
GLCD_WriteData(test[i]);
USART_Transmit(test[i]);
i++;
}
this doesn't, it returns 0xff instead of test[i] value:
uint8_t i=0;
uint8_t test[5] = {1,2,3,4,5};
while(i<5){
GLCD_WriteData(test[i]);
USART_Transmit(test[i]);
i++;
}
but this works! it returns proper values
uint8_t i=0;
uint8_t test[6] = {1,2,3,4,5};
while(i<5){
GLCD_WriteData(test[i]);
USART_Transmit(test[i]);
i++;
}
this also works:
uint8_t i=0;
uint8_t test[5];
test[0]=1;
test[1]=2;
test[2]=3;
test[3]=4;
test[4]=5;
while(i<5){
GLCD_WriteData(test[i]);
USART_Transmit(test[i]);
i++;
}
it works fine when compiled on linux
I swapped out an mcu for a different one and it works the way it should. must be an hardware problem
In first example you are going out of bounds of array test[4]. You are running while 5 times, when array has only 4 items length.
I think your problem is that you're overloading the USART. I assume that GLCD_WriteData() is VERY quick, and that USART_Transmit() buffers the character for transmission and then quickly returns. I don't know your hardware, so I can't tell - but a four-character buffer for a USART sounds reasonable.
Your five-character examples don't work because the actual character that you're trying to transmit is lost - so it puts an 0xFF in instead. You need to check the state of the USART buffer and wait for it to show that space is available (note NOT empty - that'd be inefficient!).
In the 8250 and 16450 UART chips there are two status bits:
TSRE says that the Transmit Shift Register is Empty;
THRE says that the Transmit Holding Register is Empty.
THRE can be set even when TSRE isn't - it's busy. I'd test TSRE and not send the next character until there's room - or set up a buffer and an interrupt handler.
If it's not the I/O hardware, then the only other thing that I can think of is the compiler is producing incorrect code. What is the exact declaration of USART_Transmit()? Does it expect a uint8_t? Or something else, like an int (for some reason)?
If it's something else, like int, please try the following code:
while(i<5){
int c = test[i]; // Whatever USART_Transmit wants
GLCD_WriteData(test[i]);
USART_Transmit(c);
i++;
} // while
If that always works, then you've got a compiler problem, not a hardware problem.
EDIT: Code for USART_Transmit() provided:
void USART_Transmit( uint8_t data ) {
//Wait for empty transmit buffer
while( !( UCSR0A & (1<<UDRE0)) );
//Put data into buffer, sends the data
UDR0 = data;
}
You've got something better than JTAG - you've got an LCD display! Although I don't know how many characters it has, or how long it takes to transmit a character...
You could try something like:
char Hex(uint8_t nibble) {
return nibble<10 ?
'0'+nibble :
'A'+nibble-10;
} // Hex
...
void Send(uint8_t c) {
uint8_t s;
UDR0 = c; // Send character NOW: don't wait!
do {
s = UCSR0A; // Get current USART state
//s = UCSR0A & (1<<UDRE0); // Or this: isolate ready bit...
GLCD_WriteData('x');
GLCD_WriteData(Hex(s >> 4)); // Write state-hi hex
GLCD_WriteData(Hex(s & 0xF)); // Write state-lo hex
} while (!(s & (1<<UDRE0))); // Until is actually ready
} // Send(c)
...
Send('A');
Send('B');
Send('C');
Assuming that UDRE0 is 3, then that code will result in a sequence like x00x00x00x00x00x08x00x00x00x00x08x00x00x00x08 if it is working. If it produces x08x08x08 then you've got a stuck UCSR0A bit, and it's hardware.
Old question, but giving my feedback since this is the first place I got sent while searching solution for same issue, getting even exact same results with the code samples in original question.
For me it was a bad Makefile that caused some sections to be left out by avr-objcopy as far as I know.
For example in my case, the original parameters for building my sample hex that were causing this issue:
${OBJCOPY} -j .text -O ihex led.elf led.hex
What worked a bit better:
${OBJCOPY} -O ihex -R .eeprom led.elf led.hex
I have a computer software that sends RGB color codes to Arduino using USB. It works fine when they are sent slowly but when tens of them are sent every second it freaks out. What I think happens is that the Arduino serial buffer fills out so quickly that the processor can't handle it the way I'm reading it.
#define INPUT_SIZE 11
void loop() {
if(Serial.available()) {
char input[INPUT_SIZE + 1];
byte size = Serial.readBytes(input, INPUT_SIZE);
input[size] = 0;
int channelNumber = 0;
char* channel = strtok(input, " ");
while(channel != 0) {
color[channelNumber] = atoi(channel);
channel = strtok(0, " ");
channelNumber++;
}
setColor(color);
}
}
For example the computer might send 255 0 123 where the numbers are separated by space. This works fine when the sending interval is slow enough or the buffer is always filled with only one color code, for example 255 255 255 which is 11 bytes (INPUT_SIZE). However if a color code is not 11 bytes long and a second code is sent immediately, the code still reads 11 bytes from the serial buffer and starts combining the colors and messes them up. How do I avoid this but keep it as efficient as possible?
It is not a matter of reading the serial port faster, it is a matter of not reading a fixed block of 11 characters when the input data has variable length.
You are telling it to read until 11 characters are received or the timeout occurs, but if the first group is fewer than 11 characters, and a second group follows immediately there will be no timeout, and you will partially read the second group. You seem to understand that, so I am not sure how you conclude that "reading faster" will help.
Using your existing data encoding of ASCII decimal space delimited triplets, one solution would be to read the input one character at a time until the entire triplet were read, however you could more simply use the Arduino ReadBytesUntil() function:
#define INPUT_SIZE 3
void loop()
{
if (Serial.available())
{
char rgb_str[3][INPUT_SIZE+1] = {{0},{0},{0}};
Serial.readBytesUntil( " ", rgb_str[0], INPUT_SIZE );
Serial.readBytesUntil( " ", rgb_str[1], INPUT_SIZE );
Serial.readBytesUntil( " ", rgb_str[2], INPUT_SIZE );
for( int channelNumber = 0; channelNumber < 3; channelNumber++)
{
color[channelNumber] = atoi(channel);
}
setColor(color);
}
}
Note that this solution does not require the somewhat heavyweight strtok() processing since the Stream class has done the delimiting work for you.
However there is a simpler and even more efficient solution. In your solution you are sending ASCII decimal strings then requiring the Arduino to spend CPU cycles needlessly extracting the fields and converting to integer values, when you could simply send the byte values directly - leaving if necessary the vastly more powerful PC to do any necessary processing to pack the data thus. Then the code might be simply:
void loop()
{
if( Serial.available() )
{
for( int channelNumber = 0; channelNumber < 3; channelNumber++)
{
color[channelNumber] = Serial.Read() ;
}
setColor(color);
}
}
Note that I have not tested any of above code, and the Arduino documentation is lacking in some cases with respect to descriptions of return values for example. You may need to tweak the code somewhat.
Neither of the above solve the synchronisation problem - i.e. when the colour values are streaming, how do you know which is the start of an RGB triplet? You have to rely on getting the first field value and maintaining count and sync thereafter - which is fine until perhaps the Arduino is started after data stream starts, or is reset, or the PC process is terminated and restarted asynchronously. However that was a problem too with your original implementation, so perhaps a problem to be dealt with elsewhere.
First of all, I agree with #Thomas Padron-McCarthy. Sending character string instead of a byte array(11 bytes instead of 3 bytes, and the parsing process) is wouldsimply be waste of resources. On the other hand, the approach you should follow depends on your sender:
Is it periodic or not
Is is fixed size or not
If it's periodic you can check in the time period of the messages. If not, you need to check the messages before the buffer is full.
If you think printable encoding is not suitable for you somehow; In any case i would add an checksum to the message. Let's say you have fixed size message structure:
typedef struct MyMessage
{
// unsigned char id; // id of a message maybe?
unsigned char colors[3]; // or unsigned char r,g,b; //maybe
unsigned char checksum; // more than one byte could be a more powerful checksum
};
unsigned char calcCheckSum(struct MyMessage msg)
{
//...
}
unsigned int validateCheckSum(struct MyMessage msg)
{
//...
if(valid)
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
Now, you should check every 4 byte (the size of MyMessage) in a sliding window fashion if it is valid or not:
void findMessages( )
{
struct MyMessage* msg;
byte size = Serial.readBytes(input, INPUT_SIZE);
byte msgSize = sizeof(struct MyMessage);
for(int i = 0; i+msgSize <= size; i++)
{
msg = (struct MyMessage*) input[i];
if(validateCheckSum(msg))
{// found a message
processMessage(msg);
}
else
{
//discard this byte, it's a part of a corrupted msg (you are too late to process this one maybe)
}
}
}
If It's not a fixed size, it gets complicated. But i'm guessing you don't need to hear that for this case.
EDIT (2)
I've striked out this edit upon comments.
One last thing, i would use a circular buffer. First add the received bytes into the buffer, then check the bytes in that buffer.
EDIT (3)
I gave thought on comments. I see the point of printable encoded messages. I guess my problem is working in a military company. We don't have printable encoded "fire" arguments here :) There are a lot of messages come and go all the time and decoding/encoding printable encoded messages would be waste of time. Also we use hardwares which usually has very small messages with bitfields. I accept that it could be more easy to examine/understand a printable message.
Hope it helps,
Gokhan.
If faster is really what you want....this is little far fetched.
The fastest way I can think of to meet your needs and provide synchronization is by sending a byte for each color and changing the parity bit in a defined way assuming you can read the parity and bytes value of the character with wrong parity.
You will have to deal with the changing parity and most of the characters will not be human readable, but it's gotta be one of the fastest ways to send three bytes of data.
I'm doing reverse engineering about a ultrasound probe on the Linux side. I want to capture raw data from an ultrasound probe. I'm programming with C and using the libusb API.
There are two BULK IN endpoints in the device (2 and 6). The device is sending 2048 bytes data, but it is sending data as 512 bytes with four block.
This picture is data flow on the Windows side, and I want to copy that to the Linux side. You see four data blocks with endpoint 02 and after that four data blocks with endpoint 06.
But there is a problem about timing. The first data block of endpoint 02's and first data block of endpoint 06's are close to each other acoording to time. But in data flow they are not in sequence.
I see that the computer is reading the first data blocks of endpoint 02 and 06. After that, the computer is reading the other three data blocks of endpoint 02 and endpoint 06. But in USB Analyzer, the data flow is being viewed according to the endpoint number. The sequence is different according to time.
On the Linux side, I write code like this:
int index = 0;
imageBuffer2 = (unsigned char *) malloc(2048);
imageBuffer6 = (unsigned char *) malloc(2048);
while (1) {
libusb_bulk_transfer(devh, BULK_EP_2, imageBuffer2, 2048, &actual2, 0);
libusb_bulk_transfer(devh, BULK_EP_6, imageBuffer6, 2048, &actual6, 0);
//Delay
for(index = 0; index <= 10000000; index ++)
{
}
}
So that result is in picture as below
In other words, in my code all reading data is being read in sequence according to time and endpoint number. My result is different from the data flow on the Windows side.
In brief, I have two BULK IN endpoints, and they are starting read data close according to time. How is it possible?
It's not clear to me whether you're using a different method for getting the data on Windows or not, I'm going to assume that you are.
I'm not an expert on libusb by any means, but my guess would be that you are overwriting you data with each call, since you're using the same buffer each time. Try giving your buffer a fixed value before using the transfer method, and then evaluate the result.
If it is the case, I believe something along the lines of the following would also work in C:
imageBuffer2 = (unsigned char *) malloc(2048);
char *imageBuffer2P = imageBuffer2;
imageBuffer6 = (unsigned char *) malloc(2048);
char *imageBuffer6P = imageBuffer6;
int dataRead2 = 0;
int dataRead6 = 0;
while(dataRead2 < 2048 || dataRead6 < 2048)
{
int actual2 = 0;
int actual6 = 0;
libusb_bulk_transfer(devh, BULK_EP_2, imageBuffer2P, 2048-dataRead2, &actual2, 200);
libusb_bulk_transfer(devh, BULK_EP_6, imageBuffer6P, 2048-dataRead6, &actual6, 200);
dataRead2 += actual2;
dataRead6 += actual6;
imageBuffer2P += actual2;
imageBuffer6P += actual6;
usleep(1);
}
I am trying to modify the IP header to include more IP options with the use of the libnetfiletr_queue. So far I have managed to come to the point where I obtain the packet as shown below.
if (nfq_set_mode(qh, NFQNL_COPY_PACKET, 0xffff) < 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "Unable to set nfq_set_mode\n");
exit(1);
}
Then I managed to go far as shown below,
static int my_callBack(struct nfq_q_handle *qh, struct nfgenmsg *nfmsg,struct nfq_data *tb)
{
int id = 0;
int packet_len;
unsigned char *data;
struct nfqnl_msg_packet_hdr *packet_hdr;
unsigned char *data;
packet_hdr = nfq_get_msg_packet_hdr(tb);
if (packet_hdr) {
id = ntohl(packet_hdr->packet_id);
}
packet_len = nfq_get_payload(tb, &data);
if (packet_len >= 0) {
//print payload length
printf("payload_length = %d ", packet_len);
//modify packet ip header
}
return nfq_set_verdict(qh, id, NF_ACCEPT, 0, NULL);
}
But from here onwards I am a bit confused on how to proceed on modifying the IP header of the captured packet at //modify packet ip header comment.Example on a modification to the IP header (such as traffic class(IPV6)/ IP options/ version/ flags/ destination address) is ok since I only need to understand how the modification works :).
I have tried many resources and could not succeed in proceeding any further. You expert advice and help on this query will be very much appreciated. :)
Thank you very much :)
To modify the values of an IP header, start by defining a structure to represent your header. You find what the structure should be by reading the RFC spec for the protocol you're trying to access.
Here's a link to the RFC for IPv6: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2460#section-3
The first row of the IPv6 header is a bit tricky, because they aren't using byte-aligned fields. The Version field is 4-bits wide, the Traffic Class is 8-bits wide, and the Flow Label is 20-bits wide. The whole header is 320 bits (40 bytes) and 256 of those are src and dest address. Only 64-bits are used for the other fields, so it's probably easiest to define your struct like this:
struct ipv6_hdr {
uint32_t row1;
uint16_t payload_length;
uint8_t next_header;
uint8_t hop_limit;
uint16_t src[8];
uint16_t dest[8];
};
To extract the row one values, you can use some masking:
#define VERSION_MASK 0xF0000000
#define TRAFFIC_CLASS_MASK 0x0FF00000
#define FLOW_LABEL_MASK 0x000FFFFF
struct ipv6_hdr foo;
...
nfq_get_payload(tb, &foo); // Just an example; don't overflow your buffer!
// bit-wise AND gets masked field from row1
uint8_t version = (uint8_t) ((foo->row1 & VERSION_MASK) >> 28); // shift (32-4) bits
Once you point your struct to the data payload, assuming your byte array matches this format, modifying the header values becomes simple assignment:
version = 6;
// bit-wise OR puts our value in the right place in row1
foo->row1 &= ~(VERSION_MASK) // clear out the old value first
foo->row1 = ((uint32_t) version << 28) | foo->row1;
I chose to make the src and dest addresses in the struct an array of 16-bit values because IPv6 addresses are a series of 8, 16-bit values. This should make it easy to isolate any given pair of bytes.
You will have to determine what format your data payload is in before applying the proper struct to it.
For info on how to create an IPv4 header, check its RFC: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc791#section-3.1
Hope this helps (you may have to fiddle with my code samples to get the syntax right, it's been a few months).
editing with info about checksums as requested in comments
Follow this RFC for generating checksums after modifying your header: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1071
The key take-away there is to zero the checksum field in the header before generating the new checksum.
This code doesn't send data through the UART when I connect two Board-DE2 with a COM wire. I don't understand why it isn't operating. What's wrong?
#define RS232_UART_DATA ((volatile int*) 0x10001010)
#define RS232_UART_CONTROL ((volatile int*) (0x10001010+4))
int main()
{
unsigned char hwld[] = {'H','e','l','l','o',' ','W','o','r','l','d','\0'};
unsigned char *pOutput;
pOutput = hwld;
while(*pOutput) //strings in C are zero terminated
{
//if room in output buffer
if((*RS232_UART_CONTROL)&0xffff0000 )
{
//then write the next character
*RS232_UART_DATA = (*pOutput++);
}
}
}
Could you be more specific about "connect two Board-DE2 by Com wire"? Do you want two DE2 Boards to communicate with each other? According to the web link provided by #HansPassant above, you're supposed to connect the DE2 Board to a PC that runs TeraTerm. Try this setup first and make sure you enter the correct COM port settings in TeraTerm as mentioned on the webpage.