Issue of Stream loss when having Two different Stream in SJA1110 and S32

[Abrar_23]

Hello @PavelL
@alejandro 
In FRER where i am adding RTAG_TYPE as 0xF1C1
so i am planning to Integrate FRER in CAN and also planning to add FRER for each CAMERA frames also but same RTAG_TYPE as 0xF1C1 whether that will be a Problem ?
and one more issue when after booting up the hardware at first initially if i start to send CAN frames my CAMERA feed is not coming and CAMERA frame is not coming and vice versa condtion is happening when the reboot if i start to send CAMERA Frames the CAN frames are not coming
so this was due to configuring previous configuration so what might be the root cause

Regards
Abrar

[alejandro_e]

Hello @Abrar_23,

I don't fully understand your problem, you added the tags of SJA1110 but you are talking about CAN protocol, which is not supported by the SJA1110. However I don't see how FRER (Frame Replication and Elimination for Reliability) could cause problems in your implementation, but this could depend on the speed you are using, since replicating frames uses network bandwidth.

[Abrar_23]

Hello @alejandro_e 

Sorry for giving the uncleared understanding 

So S32 Process is internally running which will do my CAN operation for for CAN Pacnet Generation. So you can just not consider about s32 implementation the main motive is in FRER in SJA1110.

So I am having a camera 30mbps at speed it's running 

So may I know brief about how much bandwidth utilization will be done during FRER Integration

May I know the network bandwidth exact numbers or something 

How the system will be utilizing bandwith because i too sense that the packet loss root cause when we are tryinv to run both stream need to Transmit parllely CAN and CAMERA

[alejandro_e]

Hello @Abrar_23,

The used bandwidth will depend on the configuration you are using and the  topology of your network, the number of frames you replicate and the size of the frames. in case your network only has the SJA1110 and the camera you mention, the use of FRER does not offer that much advantages, it offers important improvements in networks with several paths to the same nodes. Have you tested your camera without FRER? to check if this solves the other problem?

Thanks

[Abrar_23]

Hello @alejandro_e 

I think i came closer to the issue 

i would like to get a suggestion,

As i mentioned earlier i was issue when integrating CAN and CAMERA Frames when executing FRER 

So when i send the either CAN / CAMERA message the sequence Number gets added so i tried sending CAN message first three Times which is having a Sequence Number of 0,1,2 s it received similar when i Tried to send the CAMERA (replaced with ETHERNET Packet builder as a CANalyzer) so at the time i sended 3 packets the sequence number of the Packet also comes 0,1,2 

which is similar to previous CAN Packet so the Ethernet Packet which is send from CANalyzer is not accepted first 3 times since the sequence number is known 

so how can i overcome the issue ?

whether is it possible to assign sequence number for different Frame having different Sequence Number is different ?

[alejandro_e]

Hello @Abrar_23,

With this information and the one we exchanged in private it seems, as you mentioned, that the problem is the FRER configuration itself, have you contacted the manufacturers of your other devices to check if receiving devices support FRER protocol needed functionalities?

Thanks.

[Abrar_23]

Hello @alejandro_e 

Yes, so it's not because of Hardware issue of the board 

Some mis configuration is happening with the software which is Falshed 

Can you give me an insight about  SQ_NUM_GREATER what will be happening during enabling and disabling 

I know theoretically through documentation so as I mentioned the sequence number issue previously can you share me a thought about from the example what will be the reflection 

[alejandro_e]

Hello @Abrar_23,

Please note that I have limited understanding of the effects related on SEQNUM_GREATER being active (1) or inactive (0). But for now I would recommend to keep it inactive since, when active, it creates an extra check that may cause packages being rejected.

Have you been able to check if the packages are correctly being send from the SJA1110? or if the packages are being lost from the S32G to begin with?

Thanks.