FDCAN1 error in STM32G431 with interrupt vectors.

[Oleksii]

The conclusion is that setting filters and interrupts on FIFO0 leads to exception handling
FDCAN1_IT1_IRQHandler.
The reason for this behavior is an error in the file. startup_stm32g431cbtx.s

ERROR

..
.word ADC1_2_IRQHandler
.word USB_HP_IRQHandler
.word USB_LP_IRQHandler
.wordh FDCAN1_IT0_IRQHandler
.word FDCAN1_IT1_IRQHandler
.word EXTI9_5_IRQHandler
.word TIM1_BRK_TIM15_IRQHandler

..

This is how it should be

...

.word ADC1_2_IRQHandler
.word USB_HP_IRQHandler
.word USB_LP_IRQHandler
.word FDCAN1_IT1_IRQHandler
.word FDCAN1_IT0_IRQHandler
.word EXTI9_5_IRQHandler
.word TIM1_BRK_TIM15_IRQHandler

...

As an example, the code that I use is for testing so that there are no questions).

void CAN_Config(void) {

     FDCAN_GlobalTypeDef *CAN = FDCAN1;
     uint32_t *filterRAM = (uint32_t *)RAMBaseFDCAN1;

    // Включение тактирования для CAN
    RCC->APB1ENR1 |= RCC_APB1ENR1_FDCANEN;

    RCC->CCIPR &= ~RCC_CCIPR_FDCANSEL;
    //  PLL "Q" for FDCAN
    RCC->CCIPR |= (0x1 << RCC_CCIPR_FDCANSEL_Pos); 



    // Init FDCAN module
    CAN->CCCR |= FDCAN_CCCR_INIT;
    while (!(CAN->CCCR & FDCAN_CCCR_INIT));
    CAN->CCCR |= FDCAN_CCCR_CCE; 

/*
    Baudrate	NSJW	NBRP	NTSEG1	NTSEG2	FDCAN_NBTP (uint32)
    125000		1		640		543		95		0x21F5F
    250000		1		320		271		47		0x10F2F
    500000		2		160		67		12		0x08617
    800000		1		100		84		14		0x0540E
    1000000		1		80		67		11		0x0430B
*/

    // Set the nominal bit timing register
    CAN->NBTP = (1 << FDCAN_NBTP_NSJW_Pos) |
    		(1 << FDCAN_NBTP_NBRP_Pos) |
		(66 << FDCAN_NBTP_NTSEG1_Pos)|
		(11 << FDCAN_NBTP_NTSEG2_Pos);

    // Clear message RAM
    for(uint8_t i=0;i< 212;i++){filterRAM[i] = 0;};

      /*  FDCAN global filter configuration register (FDCAN_RXGFC)
      	  Address offset: 0x0080
     	  Reset value: 0x0000 0000
     */
       //CAN->RXGFC = STDfilter_n(2)|EXTfilter_n(0)|ANFS_Reject_rx|ANFE_Reject_rx;
       CAN->RXGFC = (2<<16)|(2<<4)|(2 << 2);//

       // ID filters 100 and 80
       // filterRAM[0] = STDfilterID_DUAL | STDfilterRxFIFO0 | STDfilterID1(0x100) | STDfilterID2(0x80); 
          filterRAM[0] = (1 << 30) | (1 << 27) | (0x100 << 16) | 80; 

       // Включить прерывания в FDCAN FIFO

         CAN->IE  |= 3;  // FDCAN_IE_RF0NE_| RF0FE
         CAN->ILS |= 1;  // RXFIFO0: RX FIFO bit grouping the following interruption
         CAN->ILE |= 3;  // Enable IT0

       // Normal MODE
       CAN->CCCR &= ~FDCAN_CCCR_INIT; // Выход из режима инициализации
       while (CAN->CCCR & FDCAN_CCCR_INIT);

       NVIC_EnableIRQ(FDCAN1_IT0_IRQn);;
       NVIC_EnableIRQ(FDCAN1_IT1_IRQn);
       
       }

It took me several hours to understand that someone had screwed up.(

RM0440 
Sometimes it blows my mind too))

[SofLit]

Hello,

I didn't understand how you arrived to the conclusion that the IRQ vector table needs to be in this order:

FDCAN1_IT1_IRQHandler
FDCAN1_IT0_IRQHandler

Instead of :

FDCAN1_IT0_IRQHandler
FDCAN1_IT1_IRQHandler

According to the reference manual RM0440 / Table 97. STM32G4 series vector table ,the implemented order is correct:

I invite you to use the HAL to confirm your observation instead of playing with the direct access to the registers.

[Oleksii]

I will answer your question)

Following the logic RM0440

FDCAN interrupt enable register (FDCAN_IE)

Bit 5 RF1LE: Rx FIFO 1 message lost interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled
Bit 4 RF1FE: Rx FIFO 1 full interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled
Bit 3 RF1NE: Rx FIFO 1 new message interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled
Bit 2 RF0LE: Rx FIFO 0 message lost interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled
Bit 1 RF0FE: Rx FIFO 0 full interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled
Bit 0 RF0NE: Rx FIFO 0 new message interrupt enable
0: Interrupt disabled
1: Interrupt enabled

FDCAN interrupt line select register (FDCAN_ILS)
Bit 1 RXFIFO1: RX FIFO bit grouping the following interruption
RF1LL: Rx FIFO 1 message lost interrupt line
RF1FL: Rx FIFO 1 full interrupt line
RF1NL: Rx FIFO 1 new message interrupt line

Bit 0 RXFIFO0: RX FIFO bit grouping the following interruption
RF0LL: Rx FIFO 0 message lost interrupt line
RF0FL: Rx FIFO 0 full interrupt line
RF0NL: Rx FIFO 0 new message interrupt line

What do you expect to see in the register FDCAN_ILE ?

bit0 is the enable interrupt for FIFO0
bit1 - is the enable interrupt for FIFO1.

But what do we see)
An inconvenient crutch with an attempt to justify it.

FDCAN interrupt line enable register (FDCAN_ILE)

Bit 1 EINT1: Enable interrupt line 1
0: Interrupt line fdcan_intr0_it disabled
1: Interrupt line fdcan_intr0_it enabled

Bit 0 EINT0: Enable interrupt line 0
0: Interrupt line fdcan_intr1_it disabled
1: Interrupt line fdcan_intr1_it enabled

The solution is to simply make changes to the vector table.

As for HAL - due to its multi-level abstraction, of course this error can be corrected..

But don't suggest this to me, it's a lot of extra text and extra code.)

Registers are much simpler and better.
As a result, the firmware is much smaller.

There is no need to create an entire structure to write one value to a register))