I am trying to get data from a USB serial port that is connected to an Arduino. I am using Cygwin and I write
cat /dev/ttyS4
to output the data in the shell.
When I stop the process, I am given
Access Denied
when I try to access it again. I have to close Cygwin, open it again and type in the same
command to get the output to the shell.
I have noticed that I am able to read the serial port from only one program. For example, if I read the data from the serial port in the Arduino Software, I can't access it in Cygwin.
Is there a way I can access the serial port data as many times as I want in Cygwin without having to have to close the program, open it again and write in the same command?
It appears that the statement cat /dev/ttyS4 would echo characters from the serial port until the end of the file is reached. Only, by nature, a serial port never reaches the end. So, you would need to arrange for the input to "end". One way would be to have the Arduino put an end of file character (control-D) into the output stream. The other way would be to use the so-called "heredoc" by which you tell it to look for a string to end on, as detailed in this question.
There are still a number of problems with this, though. One is, it seems wrong that control-C wouldn't close the access to the serial port. The other is, I tried this on my machine, and I can't get it to produce the problem you asked about. So, that's as much as I can offer.
Related
I have a small issue with my code, running in Python 3. I'm trying to fool Raspbian, in order to make it believe a tty is an external device.
However, I can't read a single word I wrote previously with os.write(slave, text.encode()), using something like os.read(slave, 512).
I open the tty as follow master, slave = os.openpty()
I think I'm missing a parameter or something, but I can't find out what.
I tried accessing the tty in another terminal, with a cat <, with a subprocess, but the program still block when it has to read.
Please explain what is the problem.
Regards.
I think your mistake here is that you are trying to read the slave. If you read the master instead you should get your output.
Quote from: http://www.rkoucha.fr/tech_corner/pty_pdip.html
A pseudo-terminal is a pair of character mode devices also called pty. One is master and the other is slave and they are connected with a bidirectional channel. Any data written on the slave side is forwarded to the output of the master side. Conversely, any data written on the master side is forwarded to the output of the slave side as depicted in figure 2.
RPI
I am using my open source Serial-to-IP converter (Serial Network Interface, SNI) to communicate with headless Slackware server using ttyS0 console. SNI during connection sends back to Telnet command set ff fb 01 ff fb 03. This turns Telnet from Line mode to Char mode. But i notice that Telnet replaces (adds) my CR press (0x0d) to two chars 0x0d 0x00. The Slackware's TTY itself is immune to this, but some commands i run under it, at least cat and mcedit, are not. So i try to do the following:
Insert filter in my SNI so it just throw away NULLs at direction IP->Serial. It works, but it quite ugly, because no binary transfer will be allowed anymore.
Modify Telnet's source code to remove addind NULL to CR:
inetutils-1.9.4/telnet/telnet.c from line 2294:
case '\r':
if (!crlf)
{
NETADD ('\r'); <-- added
// NET2ADD ('\r', '\0'); <-- removed
}
else
{
NET2ADD ('\r', '\n');
}
bol = flushline = 1;
break;
It also work, so i ensure i am on the right way catching the problem.
But it is also ugly due to multiple reasons, include that it is quite not portable, and obligate me to have my own non-standard telnet binary.
So the question is: It is possible to command to Telnet not to modify my CRs? (looking at this source code piece, it is not possible at all with original code, but i am sure i miss something, and this should be possible without modify source code). Note: Replace 0x0d to 0x0d, 0x0a (this is present in code) will not work with Linux TTY: it interprets this as two CRs.
And sub-question is: Where is 0x0d+0x00 used at all? I do not know any hardware device, teletype machine, etc., and any TTY, where NULL after CR used, at all. Thanks.
So i take some investigation to see how this should be solved correctly, in terms of not to abuse the software, and to find the correct tools, or clearly show there are no such tools currently.
First of all, i show why my setup is exactly as it is, and why it uses (or not uses) standard tools.
My goal is very common and essential to Linux world (as i think before). Because Linux is network operating system, Linux box should be fully configurable via network (so can/should be fully useful when headless, i.e. without display monitor). But at time when Lilo/Grub starts, there is no network. Only serial ports are able at this time (and Lilo/Grub supports it). Why it is important to remote control at this time? Just because you can (remotely) compile new custom kernel for your Slackware box, and want to test it, adding as 2nd option in Lilo list, and want to return to original kernel even when remote machine stuck when booting, so no way to remotely edit/agjust Lilo options.
But serial console is really much more powerful tool for Linux machine.
It shows boot messages and shut down messages which impossible to see via ssh, due to network is not initialized at these moments. (And remember, we do not have display).
It lets you to (suddenly or intentionally) drop all network interfaces without a fear to lost your machine, when it is many miles from you.
Note: Serial console will not work out-of-box, but can be configured in quite well known standard ways, and described in many places. Example is http://docs.slackware.com/howtos:general_admin:serial_console
Note: There is problem that serial port should be BIOS-recognized, i.e., fully onboard. USB and PCIE devices will never work at stage when Lilo/Grub boots. Fortunately there is a good news. Hardware serial ports now (slowly) return to motherboards. I test new modern Asus J1900I-C for my server, it have two rs232 ports, and it all work fine.
To use serial console benefits remotely, some sort of SNI, Serial Network Interface, should be used (and it is the only way, AFAIK). SNI typically contains (simplest possible) TCP listening server, and raw IP-to-serial duplex translator. I start study and using SNIs when Lantronix X-Port was invented. It was in 2006, and was working fine with Slackware box. (I can't remember if there was \r\0 problems or not with XPort, but let's continue). XPort was too expensive, and was replaced with my own open source SNI immediately when Wiznet W5100 was issued. (Really, there is other, essential problem, why i need to replace Lantronix. It can't press Reset or Power buttons on motherboard, while my device can, and now server is absolutely under full remote control even after kernel panic; but it is offtopic here). Also nowadays there are many cheap no-named SNIs at online shops; i do not test these.
All these times i was using telnet to connect to SNI. The main reason was that XPort docs have examples of that. And, most times it working; i can't say that \r\0 problem stops my work. Most times it is not noticeable at all (say, mc commander is resistent to NULL 's). But mcedit fear the NULLs. And recently i start to catch the problem, so this question arrives as an result.
(now please re-read from begin of thread).
And now i try to answer to my own question. All these times i was misuse the software. Telnet was not written for human communication; instead, Telnet (suddenly) use Telnet protocol, not Raw protocol; and \r\0s are probably part of protocol. (probably, because RFC says nothing about requirement of NULLs anywhere).
While Telnet and Raw protocols may looks quite close, they are not match, so sometimes should work but sometimes not.
Using bruteforce and recompiling binary, i show that Telnet can be very easily turned to Raw mode; but it is non-standard software after that, and there is no chance that it can be pushed to worldwide repos.
So i search for Raw utilites.
netcat and ncat are not have Char mode, only Line mode, so only pure console possible, no ANSI colors, mc, passwords, etc. Putty is too complex and uses GUI. And... No more utilites i found! This was quite strange and annoying...
Then i try to use initially character-based terminals, minicom and gtkterm. They are both do not allow feed ip:port structure istead of ttyS* name. But there is data translators exist, i try socat. It connects to SNI server and creates virtual serial port; then character terminal software connects to that port.
And that, finally, work. Whoa.
But very many disadvantages in this chain; complex, hard to remember commands, can't be written in one line; when SNI drops TCP connection, it is impossible to see/catch that; a LOT of garbage issued by socat into virtual port at connection time (457 packets i count!). Here are the commands for brave people who may find my work useful.
sudo socat pty,link=/dev/ttyMYPORT,raw tcp:10.1.1.11:10001 &
then
sudo chmod a+rw /dev/ttyMYPORT; gtkterm -p /dev/ttyMYPORT
or
sudo chmod a+rw /dev/ttyMYPORT; minicom -o --color=on -D /dev/ttyMYPORT
And conclusion, i do not found any simple software nowadays, that can be directly used to communicate in human raw character mode with serial port via network bridge. (Please suggest something). Thanks.
I believe the solution you are looking for is a few lines higher:
if (!crlf)
If we set crlf = true, then we would get \r\n instead of \r\0. That's probably going to work for cat and friends.
Looking through the telnet source, it appears crlf is some sort of "toggle" option. Looking an man telnet and a bit of Googling, it appears you can run something like this:
$ telnet
telnet> toggle crlf
...and you'll get \r\n sent from then on.
After reading about serial ports, virtual serial ports and such, I need a little advice to see if this is even possible. I've set up two serial ports on a Linux machine (running Ubuntu). I'd like to route the two serial ports together. Is this even possible?
The two serial ports are automatically started through the /etc/init/ttyXXX.conf getty scripts. I'd like it so that when the first serial port receives a character, it outputs that character straight away to the second serial port, and also the vice versa.
Any easy way to do this through a program or bash scripts?
The idea is that both serial ports should be able to access the linux machine with commands. However, it would be nice to be able to see the outputs of the commands regardless of which port you are attached to. For example, if port 1, logged on as root, sends "echo testing", I'd like for port 2 to see the output, but also able to see that port 1 sent the command.
Thanks
A small Perl script like this might do what you're hoping, though I'm not quite sure what you're asking, so please comment if it's not working the way you'd hope. I've only got it going one way because I think they'd just keep sending the same character back and forth if it were two way. You might also need to change the port paths near the top to whatever yours are.
Just save it as serial.pl or similar, make it executable and run it.
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Device::SerialPort;
my $port1_path = '/dev/tty1';
my $port2_path = '/dev/tty2';
my $port1 = Device::SerialPort->new($port1_path);
$port1->databits(8);
$port1->baudrate(19200);
$port1->parity("none");
$port1->stopbits(1);
my $port2 = Device::SerialPort->new($port2_path);
$port2->databits(8);
$port2->baudrate(19200);
$port2->parity("none");
$port2->stopbits(1);
while ($in = $port1->input) {
$port2->write($in);
}
It is possible to connect two serial ports between each other, with a crossover cable (so that the input of one port is connected to the output of the other port).
Assuming that you ports are correctly configured (drivers installed and loaded) and that your crossover cable is connected between your ports, you can type the following commands in two terminals:
Terminal 1: listen in the output port
$ tail -f /dev/ttyXXX
Terminal 2: write to the input port
$ echo "Hello!" > /dev/ttyYYY
If the two ports are correctly connected, the message "Hello!" will be displayed in terminal 1.
The hardest part is often to know which hardware port correspond to which device file.
If you just wanted to connect the two serial ports, you could use
socat /dev/ttyS0,raw,echo=0,crnl /dev/ttyS1,raw,echo=0,crnl
(see http://technostuff.blogspot.com/2008/10/some-useful-socat-commands.html)
But, since you want to interact with the command interpreter, I think you'll need to write a Perl script that
Opens both serial ports
Uses select to wait until one of the ports has some input for you
Pass that input to the shell
Write the output of the shell command back to both serial ports
This seems like a simple question, but it is difficult to search for. I need to interface with a device over the serial port. In the event my program (or another) does not finish writing a command to the device, how do I ensure the next run of the program can successfully send a command?
Example:
The foo program runs and begins writing "A_VERY_LONG_COMMAND"
The user terminates the program, but the program has only written, "A_VERY"
The user runs the program again, and the command is resent. Except, the device sees "A_VERYA_VERY_LONG_COMMAND," which isn't what we want.
Is there any way to make this more deterministic? Serial port programming feels very out-of-control due to issues like this.
The required method depends on the device.
Serial ports have additional control signal lines as well as the serial data line; perhaps one of them will reset the device's input. I've never done serial port programming but I think ioctl() handles this.
There may be a single byte which will reset, e.g. some control character.
There might be a timing-based signal, e.g. Hayes command set modems use “pause +++ pause”.
It might just reset after not receiving a complete command after a fixed time.
It might be useful to know whether the device was originally intended to support interactive use (serial terminal), control by a program, or both.
I would guess that if you call write("A_VERY_LONG_COMMAND"), and then the user hits Ctrl+C while the bytes are going out on the line, the driver layer should finish sending the full buffer. And if the user interrupts in the middle of the call, the driver layer will probably just ignore the whole thing.
Just in case, when you open a new COM port, it's always wise to clear the port.
Do you have control over the device end? It might make sense to implement a timeout to make the device ignore unfinished or otherwise corrupt packets.
The embedded device should be implemented such that you can either send an abort/clear/break character that will dump the contents of its command buffer and give you a clean slate on your client app startup.
Or else it should provide a software reset character which will reset the command buffer and all state.
Or else it so be designed so that you can send a command termination (perhaps a newline, etc, depending on command protocol) and possibly have an error generated on the parsing of a garbled partial command that was in its buffer, query/clear the error, and then be good to go.
It wouldn't be a bad idea upon connection of your client program to send some health/status/error query repeatedly until you get a sound response, and only then commence sending configuration or operation commands. Unless you can via a query determine that the device was left in a suitable state, you probably want to assume nothing and configure it from scratch, after a configuration reset if available.
I'm debugging communications with a serial device, and I need to see all the data flowing both directions.
It seems like this should be easy on Linux, where the serial port is represented by a file. Is there some way that I can do a sort of "bi-directional tee", where I tell my program to connect to a pipe that copies the data to a file and also shuffles it to/from the actual serial port device?
I think I might even know how to write such a beast, but it seems non-trivial, especially to get all of the ioctls passed through for port configuration, etc.
Has anyone already built such a thing? It seems too useful (for people debugging serial device drivers) not to exist already.
strace is very useful for this. You have a visualisation of all ioctl calls, with the corresponding structure decoded. The following options seems particularly useful in your case:
-e read=set
Perform a full hexadecimal and ASCII dump of all the data read from
file descriptors listed in the
specified set. For example, to see all
input activity on file descriptors 3
and 5 use -e read=3,5. Note that this
is independent from the normal tracing
of the read(2) system call which is
controlled by the option -e
trace=read.
-e write=set
Perform a full hexadecimal and ASCII
dump of all the data written to file
descriptors listed in the specified
set. For example, to see all output
activity on file descriptors 3 and 5
use -e write=3,5. Note that this is
independent from the normal tracing of
the write(2) system call which is
controlled by the option -e
trace=write.
I have found pyserial to be quite usable, so if you're into Python it shouldn't be too hard to write such a thing.
A simple method would be to write an application which opened
the master side of a pty and the tty under test. You would then
pass your tty application the slave side of the pty as the 'tty device'.
You would have to monitor the pty attributes with tcgetattr() on the pty
master and call tcsetattr() on the real tty, if the attributes changed.
The rest would be a simple select() on both fd's copying data bi-directionally and copying it to a log.
I looked at a lot of serial sniffers. All of them are based on the idea of making a virtual serial port and sniff data from that port. However, any baud/parity/flow changes will break connection.
So, I wrote my own sniffer :). Most of the serial ports now are just USB-to-serial converters. My sniffer collects data from USB through debugfs, parse it and output to the console. Also any baudrate changes, flow control, line events, and serial errors are also recorded. The project is in the early stage of development and for now, only FTDI is supported.
http://code.google.com/p/uscmon/
Much like #MBR, I was looking into serial sniffers, but the ptys broke the parity check. However, his sniffer was not helping me, as I'm using a CP2102, and not a FT232. So I wrote my own sniffer, by following this, and now I have one that can record file I/O on arbitrary files: I called it tracie.