Joystick motion to CAN connected jaguar

[Radical Pi]

Well if it returns zero during the actual running of the code and the 2CAN can retrieve a version and it doesn't work over Serial but everything works in LabVIEW, then there must be a problem in the CANJaguar.cpp file.

2 parts to this one:

Marshal: In LabVIEW's Get Firmware Version, is 0x80000000 OR'd into the ID?

sam: Go into the function GetFirmwareVersion in CANJaguar.cpp (line 866 for me) and replace this line with a different version:

ORIGINAL:
	// Set the MSB to tell the 2CAN that this is a remote message.
	getTransaction(0x80000000 | CAN_MSGID_API_FIRMVER, dataBuffer, &dataSize);

REPLACE WITH:
	// REMOVED: Set the MSB to tell the 2CAN that this is a remote message.
	getTransaction(CAN_MSGID_API_FIRMVER, dataBuffer, &dataSize);

That ORing only occurs in the GetFirmwareVersion function and seems to be the only thing that sets it apart from any other message. Also looking back through the revision logs on svn that code was introduced around the same time I started seeing the problem.

EDIT: It appears that Java had the same problem at one point and the firmware check was bypassed as a workaround

[kamocat]

Originally Posted by Radical Pi

Well if it returns zero during the actual running of the code and the 2CAN can retrieve a version and it doesn't work over Serial but everything works in LabVIEW, then there must be a problem in the CANJaguar.cpp file.

2 parts to this one:

Marshal: In LabVIEW's Get Firmware Version, is 0x80000000 OR'd into the ID?

sam: Go into the function GetFirmwareVersion in CANJaguar.cpp (line 866 for me) and replace this line with a different version:

ORIGINAL:
	// Set the MSB to tell the 2CAN that this is a remote message.
	getTransaction(0x80000000 | CAN_MSGID_API_FIRMVER, dataBuffer, &dataSize);

REPLACE WITH:
	// REMOVED: Set the MSB to tell the 2CAN that this is a remote message.
	getTransaction(CAN_MSGID_API_FIRMVER, dataBuffer, &dataSize);

That ORing only occurs in the GetFirmwareVersion function and seems to be the only thing that sets it apart from any other message. Also looking back through the revision logs on svn that code was introduced around the same time I started seeing the problem.

EDIT: It appears that Java had the same problem at one point and the firmware check was bypassed as a workaround

No, the OR is not there in the LabVIEW version.
There is just the decimal value 512 ORed with the device number.
In hexadecimal, that should be 0x0b00

What's weird about ORing 0x80000000 is that it makes TRUE the highest bit of the Arbitration ID. The highest 3 bits of the arbitration ID should be reserved.

By all means, take it out, and comment what and why you did.