Nimble BLE central
Hi all, I would like to know how nimble is managing interval windows especially when peripheral doesn't have packet to send. Is there way how to reduce Empty PDU sent in such scenarios and instead send more packets from central device to peripheral? I attached small snippet from our communication. It looks like Nimble is asking for more packets from peripheral regardless information that peripheral have nothing to sent. Regards Ondrej -- OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
gdb view threads
Hi All, is there a way how to view mynewt threads and switch between them with GDB? I have an issue with tinyusb which causes that python write timeouts. My suspicion is that a PC is writing too fast and NRF52 isn't able to process received data. Which causes freeze of the tinyusb. Regards Ondrej -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: missing "newtmgr/newtmgr.h"
Hi Łukasz, Is there a porting manual from newtmgr API to mcumgr? We are using nmgr_transport_init and newtmgr_process what are mcumgr equivalents? Regards Ondrej Dne 8/14/2020 v 9:46 AM Łukasz Rymanowski napsal(a): > Hi Ondrej, > > Newtmgr has been removed as we moved to mcumgr > (https://github.com/apache/mynewt-mcumgr) , which is basically an > extracted version of newtmgr. > It is in release notes: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MYNEWT/RN-1.8.0 > > Best > Łukasz > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 at 09:32, Ondrej Pilat <mailto:ondrej.pi...@ozobot.com>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > we used newtmgr in application for image update and its > management. When we upgrade apache-mynewt-core to the latest > version 1.8.0 newtmgr.h and newtmgr.c is missing. What we should > use instead or why newtmgr support was removed from the 1.8.0? > > We need to upgrade apache-mynewt-core because 1.7.0 isn't > compatible with the latest changes in the tinyusb repo (nrf52 USB > API changed). > > Best regards > > Ondrej Pilat > > -- > -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: missing "newtmgr/newtmgr.h"
Hi Łukasz, thank you for explanation. Is there a documentation describing the NMP (plain newtmgr protocol)? I know that CBOR is well defined RFC standard but what about 8B header? I can only find mcumgr source code. Best regards Ondrej Dne 8/14/2020 v 9:46 AM Łukasz Rymanowski napsal(a): > Hi Ondrej, > > Newtmgr has been removed as we moved to mcumgr > (https://github.com/apache/mynewt-mcumgr) , which is basically an > extracted version of newtmgr. > It is in release notes: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MYNEWT/RN-1.8.0 > > Best > Łukasz > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 at 09:32, Ondrej Pilat <mailto:ondrej.pi...@ozobot.com>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > we used newtmgr in application for image update and its > management. When we upgrade apache-mynewt-core to the latest > version 1.8.0 newtmgr.h and newtmgr.c is missing. What we should > use instead or why newtmgr support was removed from the 1.8.0? > > We need to upgrade apache-mynewt-core because 1.7.0 isn't > compatible with the latest changes in the tinyusb repo (nrf52 USB > API changed). > > Best regards > > Ondrej Pilat > > -- > -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
missing "newtmgr/newtmgr.h"
Hi all, we used newtmgr in application for image update and its management. When we upgrade apache-mynewt-core to the latest version 1.8.0 newtmgr.h and newtmgr.c is missing. What we should use instead or why newtmgr support was removed from the 1.8.0? We need to upgrade apache-mynewt-core because 1.7.0 isn't compatible with the latest changes in the tinyusb repo (nrf52 USB API changed). Best regards Ondrej Pilat -- # # Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one # or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file # distributed with this work for additional information # regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file # to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the # "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance # with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at # # http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 # # Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, # software distributed under the License is distributed on an # "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY # KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the # specific language governing permissions and limitations # under the License. # project.name: "my_project" project.repositories: - apache-mynewt-core - tinyusb # Use github's distribution mechanism for core ASF libraries. # This provides mirroring automatically for us. # repository.apache-mynewt-core: type: github vers: 1.8.0 user: apache repo: mynewt-core repository.tinyusb: type: github vers: c39dc03331683167be3c2a6ca59a4ee8e6e6620d-commit user: hathach repo: tinyusb # Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one # or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file # distributed with this work for additional information # regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file # to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the # "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance # with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at # # http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 # # Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, # software distributed under the License is distributed on an # "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY # KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the # specific language governing permissions and limitations # under the License. # pkg.name: apps/blecent pkg.type: app pkg.description: Simple BLE central application. pkg.author: "Apache Mynewt " pkg.homepage: "http://mynewt.apache.org/; pkg.keywords: - usb pkg.deps: - "@apache-mynewt-core/kernel/os" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/console/stub" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/controller" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/host" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/host/util" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/host/services/gap" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/host/services/gatt" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/host/store/ram" - "@apache-mynewt-nimble/nimble/transport/ram" - "@apache-mynewt-core/fs/fs" # include the file operations interfaces - "@apache-mynewt-core/fs/nffs" # include the NFFS filesystem implementation - "@apache-mynewt-core/mgmt/smp" - "@apache-mynewt-core/mgmt/imgmgr" #- "@apache-mynewt-core/mgmt/newtmgr/transport/ble" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/log/full" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/stats/full" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/reboot" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/config" - "@apache-mynewt-core/sys/id" # - "@apache-mynewt-core/test/crash_test" # - "@apache-mynewt-core/test/runtest" - "@mcuboot/boot/bootutil" - "@apache-mynewt-core/hw/hal" - "@tinyusb/tinyusb" pkg.cflags: - "-I@tinyusb/src" pkg.lflags: - "-lm" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
c++ support
Hi All, tried anybody to use C++ with NRF52? When I patch some files I can use C++ but startup code doesn't call global object constructors. Should I add a linker flag or something else in the project.yml or somewhere else or this isn't supported? Thank you Ondrej Pilat -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: how to restrict Nimble to send only 1 or 2 message/s per connection event when Nimble is as peripheral
Hi All, I am resending this mail because nobody responded. Can please somebody look on this issue? Regards Ondrej Pilat Dne 6/9/2020 v 10:22 AM Ondrej Pilat napsal(a): > > Hi All, > > Is it possible to tell Nimble to send only 1 or 2 packets per each > connection event when Nimble is as peripheral? I have application > which serves as 1 to X bridge (X can be up to 18). I need to restrict > connection between PC and the NRF52 to send only 1 to 2 packets per > connection event otherwise it uses to much from the throughput that > connection between nrf52 and 18 devices cannot have interval window 60 > to 120ms. Instead they are communicating with 300 to 500ms period. > > From previous communication: > > /My assumption are following:/ > > // > > * /only one packet per each connection event/ > * /send/receive 132B packet between NRF52 and PC each connection event/ > * /send/receive 20B packet between NRF52 and peripheral each > connection event/ > > // > > /I made following rough computation:/ > > // > > /PC <-> NRF52: 132B data + 21B header => (153B * 8) / 1Mbps => 1224 uS > + 150 uS IFR + 80 uS ACK + 150 uS IFR => 1604 uS * 2 (send/receive) => > 3208 uS // > / > > // > > /NRF52 <-> peripheral: 20B data + 21B header => (41B * 8) / 1Mbps => > 328uS + 150 uS IFR + 80 uS ACK + 150uS IFR => 708uS * 2 (send/receive) > => 1416 uS/ > > /It means one big and six small packets should fit in each PC <-> > NRF52 connection event 3208 + 6 * 1416 = 11 704 < 12.5ms interval > window. For 18 peripherals it means 3 such cycles to serve them all > therefore 37.5ms interval window between NRF52 and a peripheral. > / > > /On this I received response:/ > > You need to take NimBLE scheduling into account here. Each connection event > is preallocated a fixed amount of time in 1250us slots - see > BLE_LL_CONN_INIT_SLOTS. This means effectively connection events cannot be > scheduled less than 1250us apart. Also, scheduler overhead is ~200us (for > nRF52, may be different for nRF51) for each connection event so effective > connection event time with 1 slot allocated is 1050us. Note that this is > min time since connection events can be extended pretty much indefinitely > as long as there is no other activity scheduled so e.g. until another > connection event. > > I do not know if "20B packet" means "20 bytes of LL payload", but will > assume so since we are talking LL level here. This can fit into a single > scheduled slot: 240us + 150us + 80us = 470us < 1050us. Let's assume 1ms for > each connection event including scheduler overhead so you need 18ms to > serve all 18 devices in one direction. If you need to send data in both > directions you need 240us + 150us + 240us = 630us < 1050us so nothing > changes and you still have quite a lot of extra time to spare in each > connection event (e.g. for retransmissions). It will be a bit different if > you need to transfer data in both directions in separate connection events > as basically you need twice as much connection events, this means you need > at least 36ms to serve all peripherals. One possible problem here is that > connection may not be scheduled exactly 1.25ms apart and this will create > gaps where no connection can be scheduled, you can't really control this > with default scheduler. Possible solution would be to use > BLE_LL_STRICT_CONN_SCHEDULING which schedules connections in central role > at fixed intervals, although I never used it so not sure if there's > anything that requires more configuration than just enabling this feature. > > When I take these information in account I get that Nimble should be > able to have: > 10ms interval window between a PC and NRF52 (Nimble is as peripheral) > 60ms interval windows with 18 devices (Nimble is as central device) > > I am not able to achive such values. Attached is sniffed communication > between PC and NRF52 which shows that there is no space left for the > other devices to communicate with 60ms windows. During my tests the > Nimble is sending packets betwen NRF52 and devices with 300ms to 500ms > period although interval windows is set to 120ms with them. > > Best regards > Ondrej Pilat > > -- -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: nimble doesn't receive 31B scan response
Hi, does nimble ask for the scan response only once? It looks that it was fault in our code and cheap sniffer doesn't catch it :(. Regards Ondrej Dne 5/12/2020 v 4:51 PM Andrzej Kaczmarek napsal(a): > Hi, > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:05 PM Ondrej Pilat <mailto:ondrej.pi...@ozobot.com>> wrote: > > Hi All, > > we have device which in the past had 29B scan response and nimble > properly asked for it. Now We extended scan response at 31B to use > it whole but now nimble doesn't ask for it. No ble_gap_disc_desc > *disc with disc->event_type === BLE_HCI_ADV_RPT_EVTYPE_SCAN_RSP > for our device. > > The scanner cannot decide whether to send a scan request or not based > on the length of the scan response because it does not know that > length in advance. Did you really see that NimBLE does not send a scan > request to your device? Could be simply that your device does not send > a scan response or there's something wrong (configuration?) with > advertising packets. The best would be if you could provide some logs > (HCI, air, etc.) that would show us how advertising is configured on > your device and how the scanner is configured in NimBLE. > > Where can be an issue? Does nimble support 31B scan response? > > Yes, it's required by spec. > > Regards > > Ondrej > > Best, > Andrzej > > > -- > > -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
nimble doesn't receive 31B scan response
Hi All, we have device which in the past had 29B scan response and nimble properly asked for it. Now We extended scan response at 31B to use it whole but now nimble doesn't ask for it. No ble_gap_disc_desc *disc with disc->event_type === BLE_HCI_ADV_RPT_EVTYPE_SCAN_RSP for our device. Where can be an issue? Does nimble support 31B scan response? Regards Ondrej -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
how to link a static library or copy repo from the bitbucket
Hi All, I would like to link my newt code with my static library or its code and let newt to build it from the source code. My library is on the bitbucket, uses mercurial and cmake. What is the best way and how to make includes visible? Newt can generate cmake for a target. Can it load/use cmake project too? Newt build system documentation describes only way with github and git. I do not want to convert my repository to git and move it to the github. Regards Ondrej -- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
BLE communication scheduling
Hi,
I cannot find any documentation about Nimble connection events
scheduling. I have following scenario:
NRF52 Nimble is in dual role setting. Peripheral device connected to a
PC with at least BLE 4.2 and MTU more than 153B. Central is connected to
18 peripheral devices BLE 4.1 with MTU 27B.
Do you think that Nimble can keep interval window 12.5ms with the PC and
37.5ms with all peripherals?
My assumption are following:
* only one packet per each connection event
* send/receive 132B packet between NRF52 and PC each connection event
* send/receive 20B packet between NRF52 and peripheral each connection
event
I made following rough computation:
PC <-> NRF52: 132B data + 21B header => (153B * 8) / 1Mbps => 1224 uS +
150 uS IFR + 80 uS ACK + 150 uS IFR => 1604 uS * 2 (send/receive) =>
3208 uS
NRF52 <-> peripheral: 20B data + 21B header => (41B * 8) / 1Mbps =>
328uS + 150 uS IFR + 80 uS ACK + 150uS IFR => 708uS * 2 (send/receive)
=> 1416 uS
It means one big and six small packets should fit in each PC <-> NRF52
connection event 3208 + 6 * 1416 = 11 704 < 12.5ms interval window. For
18 peripherals it means 3 such cycles to serve them all therefore 37.5ms
interval window between NRF52 and a peripheral.
Are following parameters good to achieve this:
NRF52 <-> PC
static const struct ble_gap_conn_params ble_gap_conn_params_ideal = {
.scan_itvl = BLE_GAP_SCAN_FAST_INTERVAL_MIN,
.scan_window = BLE_GAP_SCAN_FAST_WINDOW,
.itvl_min = 10,
.itvl_max = 10,
.latency = 0,
.supervision_timeout = 500,
.min_ce_len = 5, // 3.208 / 0.625 = 5.1328
.max_ce_len = 6,
};
NRF52 <-> Peripheral
static const struct ble_gap_conn_params ble_gap_conn_params_ideal = {
.scan_itvl = BLE_GAP_SCAN_FAST_INTERVAL_MIN,
.scan_window = BLE_GAP_SCAN_FAST_WINDOW,
.itvl_min = 30,
.itvl_max = 30,
.latency = 0,
.supervision_timeout = 500,
.min_ce_len = 2, // 1.416 / 0.625 = 2.2656
.max_ce_len = 3,
};
Regards
Ondrej
--
