Incorrect CRC calculation in protocol. One is implemented using zlib and the other one is calculated in function

0

I am implementing a protocol in an STM32F412 board. It's almost done, I just need to do a CRC check for the received data.

I tried using the internal CRC module for calculating the CRC but I could not match the result to any online CRC algorithm online, so I decided to do a simple implementation of the Ethernet CRC.

static const uint32_t crc32_tab[] =
{
    0x00000000L, 0x77073096L, 0xee0e612cL, 0x990951baL, 0x076dc419L,
    0x706af48fL, 0xe963a535L, 0x9e6495a3L, 0x0edb8832L, 0x79dcb8a4L,
    0xe0d5e91eL, 0x97d2d988L, 0x09b64c2bL, 0x7eb17cbdL, 0xe7b82d07L,
    0x90bf1d91L, 0x1db71064L, 0x6ab020f2L, 0xf3b97148L, 0x84be41deL,
    0x1adad47dL, 0x6ddde4ebL, 0xf4d4b551L, 0x83d385c7L, 0x136c9856L,
    0x646ba8c0L, 0xfd62f97aL, 0x8a65c9ecL, 0x14015c4fL, 0x63066cd9L,
    0xfa0f3d63L, 0x8d080df5L, 0x3b6e20c8L, 0x4c69105eL, 0xd56041e4L,
    0xa2677172L, 0x3c03e4d1L, 0x4b04d447L, 0xd20d85fdL, 0xa50ab56bL,
    0x35b5a8faL, 0x42b2986cL, 0xdbbbc9d6L, 0xacbcf940L, 0x32d86ce3L,
    0x45df5c75L, 0xdcd60dcfL, 0xabd13d59L, 0x26d930acL, 0x51de003aL,
    0xc8d75180L, 0xbfd06116L, 0x21b4f4b5L, 0x56b3c423L, 0xcfba9599L,
    0xb8bda50fL, 0x2802b89eL, 0x5f058808L, 0xc60cd9b2L, 0xb10be924L,
    0x2f6f7c87L, 0x58684c11L, 0xc1611dabL, 0xb6662d3dL, 0x76dc4190L,
    0x01db7106L, 0x98d220bcL, 0xefd5102aL, 0x71b18589L, 0x06b6b51fL,
    0x9fbfe4a5L, 0xe8b8d433L, 0x7807c9a2L, 0x0f00f934L, 0x9609a88eL,
    0xe10e9818L, 0x7f6a0dbbL, 0x086d3d2dL, 0x91646c97L, 0xe6635c01L,
    0x6b6b51f4L, 0x1c6c6162L, 0x856530d8L, 0xf262004eL, 0x6c0695edL,
    0x1b01a57bL, 0x8208f4c1L, 0xf50fc457L, 0x65b0d9c6L, 0x12b7e950L,
    0x8bbeb8eaL, 0xfcb9887cL, 0x62dd1ddfL, 0x15da2d49L, 0x8cd37cf3L,
    0xfbd44c65L, 0x4db26158L, 0x3ab551ceL, 0xa3bc0074L, 0xd4bb30e2L,
    0x4adfa541L, 0x3dd895d7L, 0xa4d1c46dL, 0xd3d6f4fbL, 0x4369e96aL,
    0x346ed9fcL, 0xad678846L, 0xda60b8d0L, 0x44042d73L, 0x33031de5L,
    0xaa0a4c5fL, 0xdd0d7cc9L, 0x5005713cL, 0x270241aaL, 0xbe0b1010L,
    0xc90c2086L, 0x5768b525L, 0x206f85b3L, 0xb966d409L, 0xce61e49fL,
    0x5edef90eL, 0x29d9c998L, 0xb0d09822L, 0xc7d7a8b4L, 0x59b33d17L,
    0x2eb40d81L, 0xb7bd5c3bL, 0xc0ba6cadL, 0xedb88320L, 0x9abfb3b6L,
    0x03b6e20cL, 0x74b1d29aL, 0xead54739L, 0x9dd277afL, 0x04db2615L,
    0x73dc1683L, 0xe3630b12L, 0x94643b84L, 0x0d6d6a3eL, 0x7a6a5aa8L,
    0xe40ecf0bL, 0x9309ff9dL, 0x0a00ae27L, 0x7d079eb1L, 0xf00f9344L,
    0x8708a3d2L, 0x1e01f268L, 0x6906c2feL, 0xf762575dL, 0x806567cbL,
    0x196c3671L, 0x6e6b06e7L, 0xfed41b76L, 0x89d32be0L, 0x10da7a5aL,
    0x67dd4accL, 0xf9b9df6fL, 0x8ebeeff9L, 0x17b7be43L, 0x60b08ed5L,
    0xd6d6a3e8L, 0xa1d1937eL, 0x38d8c2c4L, 0x4fdff252L, 0xd1bb67f1L,
    0xa6bc5767L, 0x3fb506ddL, 0x48b2364bL, 0xd80d2bdaL, 0xaf0a1b4cL,
    0x36034af6L, 0x41047a60L, 0xdf60efc3L, 0xa867df55L, 0x316e8eefL,
    0x4669be79L, 0xcb61b38cL, 0xbc66831aL, 0x256fd2a0L, 0x5268e236L,
    0xcc0c7795L, 0xbb0b4703L, 0x220216b9L, 0x5505262fL, 0xc5ba3bbeL,
    0xb2bd0b28L, 0x2bb45a92L, 0x5cb36a04L, 0xc2d7ffa7L, 0xb5d0cf31L,
    0x2cd99e8bL, 0x5bdeae1dL, 0x9b64c2b0L, 0xec63f226L, 0x756aa39cL,
    0x026d930aL, 0x9c0906a9L, 0xeb0e363fL, 0x72076785L, 0x05005713L,
    0x95bf4a82L, 0xe2b87a14L, 0x7bb12baeL, 0x0cb61b38L, 0x92d28e9bL,
    0xe5d5be0dL, 0x7cdcefb7L, 0x0bdbdf21L, 0x86d3d2d4L, 0xf1d4e242L,
    0x68ddb3f8L, 0x1fda836eL, 0x81be16cdL, 0xf6b9265bL, 0x6fb077e1L,
    0x18b74777L, 0x88085ae6L, 0xff0f6a70L, 0x66063bcaL, 0x11010b5cL,
    0x8f659effL, 0xf862ae69L, 0x616bffd3L, 0x166ccf45L, 0xa00ae278L,
    0xd70dd2eeL, 0x4e048354L, 0x3903b3c2L, 0xa7672661L, 0xd06016f7L,
    0x4969474dL, 0x3e6e77dbL, 0xaed16a4aL, 0xd9d65adcL, 0x40df0b66L,
    0x37d83bf0L, 0xa9bcae53L, 0xdebb9ec5L, 0x47b2cf7fL, 0x30b5ffe9L,
    0xbdbdf21cL, 0xcabac28aL, 0x53b39330L, 0x24b4a3a6L, 0xbad03605L,
    0xcdd70693L, 0x54de5729L, 0x23d967bfL, 0xb3667a2eL, 0xc4614ab8L,
    0x5d681b02L, 0x2a6f2b94L, 0xb40bbe37L, 0xc30c8ea1L, 0x5a05df1bL,
    0x2d02ef8dL
};

uint32_t calc_crc_calculate(uint8_t *pData, uint32_t uLen)
{
    uint32_t val = 0xFFFFFFFFU;
    int i;

    for(i = 0; i < uLen; i++) {
        val = crc32_tab[(val ^ pData[i]) & 0xFF] ^ ((val >> 8) & 0x00FFFFFF);
    }

    return val^0xFFFFFFFF;
}

I calculated the crc of 0x6F and compared the result to the online calculators and it apparently matches.

When I try to test the protocol with my python code I'm just unable to match the CRCs. On python I'm using the following code:

d = 0x6f
crc = zlib.crc32(bytes(d))&0xFFFFFFFF

I'm now unable to tell which is right. Apparently my algorithm is OK because it matches the online calculator. BUT those online calculators do not seem to be reliable sometimes and I doubt that python's zlib implementation is wrong .. I may be using it wrong at worst.

python
c
stm32
zlib
crc
asked on Stack Overflow Jul 18, 2019 by morcillo

2 Answers

1

Actually you can compute the Ethernet CRC32 with the builtin module of the STM32. It took me quite a while to make it match up as well.

This code should match up for sizes divisible by 4 (I also used python zlib on the other end):

#include "stm32l4xx_hal.h"

uint32_t CRC32_Compute(const uint32_t *data, size_t sizeIn32BitWords)
{
  CRC_HandleTypeDef hcrc = {
    .Instance = CRC,
    .Init.DefaultPolynomialUse = DEFAULT_POLYNOMIAL_ENABLE,
    .Init.DefaultInitValueUse = DEFAULT_INIT_VALUE_ENABLE,
    .Init.InputDataInversionMode = CRC_INPUTDATA_INVERSION_WORD,
    .Init.OutputDataInversionMode = CRC_OUTPUTDATA_INVERSION_ENABLE,
    .InputDataFormat = CRC_INPUTDATA_FORMAT_WORDS,
  };
  HAL_StatusTypeDef status = HAL_CRC_Init(&hcrc);
  assert (status == HAL_OK)
  uint32_t checksum =  HAL_CRC_Calculate(&hcrc, data, sizeIn32BitWords);

  uint32_t checksumInverted = ~checksum;
  return checksumInverted;
}

The challenge with sizes not divisible by 4 is to get the "inversion/reversal" (changing the bit order) right. There is an example how the hardware handles this in the "RM0394 Reference manual STM32L43xxx STM32L44xxx STM32L45xxx STM32L46xxx advanced ARMĀ®-based 32-bit MCUs Rev 3" on page 333. The essence is that reversal reverses the bit order. For CRC32 this reversal must happen on the word level, i.e. over 32 bits.

answered on Stack Overflow Jul 19, 2019 by PaulR • edited Aug 1, 2019 by PaulR
0

Ok. It certainly was a bug on my part. But it was happening in my python code.

I suddenly realized that I was practically doing bytes(0x6F) which just creates an array with 111 positions.

What I actually needed to do was

import struct

d = pack('B', 0x6F)
crc = zlib.crc32(bytes(d))&0xFFFFFFFF

This question could have been avoided had I just done a little bit of rubber duck debugging. Hopefuly this will help someone else.

answered on Stack Overflow Jul 18, 2019 by morcillo

User contributions licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0