I am using LPC2368 to communicate with PC using USB CDC.
When PC sends the command to LPC over Bulk Out End Point 2,LPC2368 recives 4104 bytes from UART which is sent to PC over USB CDC Bulk IN Endpoint 2.
At PC,this data is considered to be coming form virtual com port,enabling me to see the data (sent to PC) over hypertermial.
There are some commands to which response is less than 64bytes.
After sending command to get these 4104bytes,the 4014 bytes are successfully received from UART and sent in for loop(for in bulk transmission only 64 bytes can be sent in one go) to PC.
Now,if any command be sent after receiving the 4104 bytes,no response is seen.Only,after sending command twice I get response.
Can anyone guide to resolve this behavior of USB?
for in bulk transmission only 64 bytes can be sent in one go
Yes, and the connection will "hang" if your last transaction is exactly 64 bytes long. Reason is little known feature of bulk pipes that treats back-to-back 64 byte (max packet size) transactions as as single larger transaction. Any packet smaller than max packet size will finish a transaction.
A fix is simple: If you have no more bytes to transmit after a 64 byte packet, just transmit a zero packet. Yes, that is a packet containing no data bytes.
Most USB2UART example codes do not implement this fix, because the UART is usually not fast enough to fill the fifo to 64 bytes in the first place.
Related
I have a simple application where I send OPUS packets from one client to other say A to B.
A reads one packet from a OPUS file, and send to B.
Again after 20ms or 30ms reads one more packet and send to B, so on..
Till now I was using RTP over UDP, so on receiving side at B, when I receive the packet, I receive complete packet. After receiving complete packet I write to a new file.
This works fine.
Now I am planning to support RTP over TCP.
A will read a complete packet from OPUS file and send to B.
When packet is received at B, it may be received as a single packet or multiple packet (tcp behaviour). My requirement is, I should buffer the data till I receive complete packet. Once I receive complete packet, I will write it to a file.
Now my question is, how do I determine the length of OPUS packet at B while I receiving, so that I can buffer it.
Do not want to use libopus etc if somehow I can avoid it. If by any means from received data, can I find out length of packet?
TCP is a stream protocol. You have two primary choices: add a length word (16 bits is enough) before each Opus packet (read length, then read packet, dealing with buffering (wait to get enough bytes for the read), or pad every Opus packet to a specific size. Opus doesn't use fixed-size packets; they depend on the content and the bitrate and quality settings.
Depiction of state transitions with NYET, NAK and PING packets
What special purpose does NYET serve when the next transaction could be simply be avoided by a NAK packet from the device?
The reason for the introduction of the NYET handshake packet were bandwidth utilization efficiency considerations.
If a device responds with a NYET, the host knows that the device will very likely NAK the next OUT transaction which means that the whole frame time the data is being transmitted is wasted: The exact same data will have to be sent again.
That's why NAKing an OUT transaction wastes a lot of frame time since the OUT transaction occupies the bus without purpose and it competes with other transactions/devices as well, taking frame time from them.
Imagine the protocol without the NYET handshake: The host would have to send the same whole block of data (i.e. up to 512 bytes for bulk endpoints) every time the device NAKs just to inquiry if the device is ready.
If the host gets a NYET instead, it will start PINGing the device, asking if the device is ready to receive more data. A PING transaction is very short compared to a large data OUT transaction. Hence, if the device NAKs the PING, the host can use the rest of the frame for other transactions instead which leads to better utilization of the bus.
I am using a SAM4E-EK board, and the processor is SAM4E. The board is equiped with a ADS7843 touch controller, contected from the processor through a SPI channel.
The chapter of SPI in datasheet of SAM4E said that
While the data in the Shift Register is shifted on the MOSI line, the MISO line is sampled and shifted in the Shift Register. Receiving data cannot occur without transmitting data.
But in an example for ADS7843 from ASF, it just sends data(8 bits) three times at first, and then it can receives data(8 bits) three times! I have test it, and it work fine.
So I think there is a hardware FIFO buffer in SPI receiver. But I can not find any related information in the datasheet and internet.
Am I right? or is there others mechanism making the example runs correctly?
The SAM4E manual says that SPI Receive Data Register has the size of 2 bytes
The ADS7843 manual says:
One complete conversion can be accomplished with three serial
communications, for a total of 24 clock cycles on the DCLK input
The figure 5 shows that byte0 is a request to ADS7843 and bytes1-2 are response.
You should send 1 byte of command and 2 dump bytes to provide SPI clocking while the ADS7843 is responsing (the manual says
Receiving data cannot occur without transmitting data
And when you reading 3 bytes, you get the 2 bytes of answer, stored in the SPI Receiver register
I am writing code for a USB device. Suppose the USB host starts a control read transfer to read some data from the device, and the amount of data requested (wLength in the Setup Packet) is a multiple of the Endpoint 0 max packet size. Then after the host has received all the data (in the form of several IN transactions with maximum-sized data packets), will it initiate another IN transaction to see if there is more data even though there can't be more?
Here's an example sequence of events that I am wondering about:
USB enumeration process: max packet size on endpoint 0 is reported to be 64.
SETUP-DATA-ACK transaction starts a control read transfer, wLength = 128.
IN-DATA-ACK transaction delivers first 64 bytes of data to host.
IN-DATA-ACK transaction delivers last 64 bytes of data to host.
IN-DATA-ACK with zero-length DATA packet? Does this transaction ever happen?
OUT-DATA-ACK transaction completes Status Phase of the transfer; transfer is over.
I tested this on my computer (Windows Vista, if it matters) and the answer was no: the host was smart enough to know that no more data can be received from the device, even though all the packets sent by the device were full (maximum size allowed on Endpoint 0). I'm wondering if there are any hosts that are not smart enough, and will try to perform another IN transaction and expect to receive a zero-length data packet.
I think I read the relevant parts of the USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 specifications from usb.org but I did not find this issue addressed. I would appreciate it if someone can point me to the right section in either of those documents.
I know that a zero-length packet can be necessary if the device chooses to send less data than the host requested in wLength.
I know that I could make my code flexible enough to handle either case, but I'm hoping I don't have to.
Thanks to anyone who can answer this question!
Read carefully USB specification:
The Data stage of a control transfer from an endpoint to the host is complete when the endpoint does one of
the following:
Has transferred exactly the amount of data specified during the Setup stage
Transfers a packet with a payload size less than wMaxPacketSize or transfers a zero-length packet
So, in your case, when wLength == transfer size, answer is NO, you don't need ZLP.
In case wLength > transfer size, and (transfer size % ep0 size) == 0 answer is YES, you need ZLP.
In general, USB uses a less-than-max-length packet to demarcate an end-of-transfer. So in the case of a transfer which is an integer multiple of max-packet-length, a ZLP is used for demarcation.
You see this in bulk pipes a lot. For example, if you have a 4096 byte transfer, that will be broken down into an integer number of max-length packets plus one zero-length-packet. If the SW driver has a big enough receive buffer set up, higher-level SW receives the entire transfer at once, when the ZLP occurs.
Control transfers are a special case because they have the wLength field, so ZLP isn't strictly necessary.
But I'd strongly suggest SW be flexible to both, as you may see variations with different USB host silicon or low-level HCD drivers.
I would like to expand on MBR's answer. The USB specification 2.0, in section 5.5.3, says:
The Data stage of a control transfer from an endpoint to the host is
complete when the endpoint does one of the following:
Has transferred exactly the amount of data specified during the Setup stage
Transfers a packet with a payload size less than wMaxPacketSize or transfers a zero-length packet
When a Data stage is complete, the Host Controller advances to the
Status stage instead of continuing on with another data transaction.
If the Host Controller does not advance to the Status stage when the
Data stage is complete, the endpoint halts the pipe as was outlined in
Section 5.3.2. If a larger-than-expected data payload is received from
the endpoint, the IRP for the control transfer will be
aborted/retired.
I added emphasis to one of the sentences in that quote because it seems to specifically say what the device should do: it should "halt" the pipe if the host tries to continue the data phase after it was done, and it is done if all the requested data has been transmitted (i.e. the number of bytes transferred is greater than or equal to wLength). I think halting refers to sending a STALL packet.
In other words, the device does not need a zero-length packet in this situation and in fact the USB specification says it should not provide one.
You don't have to. (*)
The whole point of wLength is to tell the host the maximum number of bytes it should attempt to read (but it might read less !)
(*) I have seen devices that crash when IN/OUT requests were made at incorrect time during control transfers (when debugging our host solution). So any host doing what you are worried about, would of killed those devices and is hopefully not in the market.
I'm implementing USB on a PIC 18F2550 using a generic HID interface. I've set up the HID profile configuation to have a single 64 byte message for both inputs and outputs.
Now it's basically working. The device registers OK with windows. I can find it in my program on the PC and can send and receive data to it. The problem is this though - messages from the PC to the PIC are truncated to the size of the EP0 endpoint buffer.
Before I go debugging too much further I want to try to clarify my understanding of the USB protocols here and check I got it right.
Assume that the EP0 input buffer is 8 bytes. It's my understanding that the PC end will send a control packet which is 8 bytes. In there is the length in bytes of the data to follow. And then it will send a sequence of 8 byte data packets and the PIC end has to acknowledge each one.
It's my understanding that the PC end knows how big each packet may be by looking in the maximum packet size field in the device descriptor and will divide up the message accordingly into multiple data packets.
Before I go looking for more hours at the code, can anyone confirm that this is basically correct? That if the EP0 buffer size is 8 bytes then the PC should know this because of the configuration field I mentioned above and send multiple data packets?
If I make my receive buffer on the PIC 64 bytes then I get 64 bytes of the message which is sufficient for my needs, but I don't like not understanding why it doesn't work with small buffers, and one day I'll probably need them anyway.
Any advice or information would be welcome.
There is something called Endpoint Descriptor, which, among other things, defines the wMaxPacketSize - which is what the Host Controller Interface drivers use to subdivide a large USB transfer into smaller packets.
This is entirely different from the EP0 buffer size - which however, is always required to be larger than the wMaxPacketSize. My guess is (try posting your usb_config.h and usb_descriptors.c, if you use Microchip USB stack), that you're either trying to use 8-byte long EP0 with 64-byte long wMaxPacketSize, which is truncating the transfer.
Also, be aware that in USB 1.1 Low Speed, the wMaxPacketSize cannot exceed 8, and in USB 1.1 Full Speed it cannot exceed 64.
0x07,/*sizeof(USB_EP_DSC)*/
USB_DESCRIPTOR_ENDPOINT, //Endpoint Descriptor
HID_EP | _EP_IN, //EndpointAddress
_INTERRUPT, //Attributes
DESC_CONFIG_WORD(9), //size
0x01, //Interval
/* Endpoint Descriptor */
0x07,/*sizeof(USB_EP_DSC)*/
USB_DESCRIPTOR_ENDPOINT, //Endpoint Descriptor
HID_EP | _EP_OUT, //EndpointAddress
_INTERRUPT, //Attributes
DESC_CONFIG_WORD(9), //size
0x01 //Interval