On 10/27/20 12:27 PM, Yegor Yefremov wrote: >>> Can you add a row description that indicated that these numbers are. They >>> are >>> probably bit positions within the CAN-ID? >> >> This is true for up to 99.9%, depending on who you ask. >> this maps indeed to the bit positions in the CAN-ID, as in J1939-21. >> The trouble is that PGN's are also communicated as such in the payload, >> e.g. in the TP and ETP (see J1939-81 if i remember correctly). >> Since only PGN is written there, without SA, the bit position relative >> to the CAN-ID are ... making things look fuzzy. >> >> So I the best I can propose is to add a 2nd row :-)
Sounds reasonable. > I have sent v2. Should I also include the tables for PDU1 and PDU2 > formats as well as the general table with ID and Data? See Wiki [1] Make it so. > [1] > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_J1939#/media/Datei:J1939_Aufsplittung_CAN-Identifier.png regards, Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
