Direct control has the same problem. And you don't need a network-based rig
for this problem. I duplicated it on my MK706MKIIG over serial just by turning
the rig off, wait for the timeout, turn it back on, and retry.
I think this is why we keep seeing all these random errors for getting vfo/freq
etc.....it's been borderline for a long time.
JTDX has added getting power levels and it is popping up there a lot now due to
the added commands.
The polling interval/timeout applies to any communication....so having a longer
timeout there unrelated to polling rate would be better. I would vote at least
3 seconds.
The longest timeout we have in hamlib right now is 10 seconds for trxmanager.
We have 2.5 seconds in netrigctl.cAnd lots of 2 second timeouts.Note that even
those can have multiple retries and that's where the 600ms timeout in the Flex
started being triggered during profile changes with WSJT-X timing out on top of
it.
Mike
On Friday, April 24, 2020, 05:51:18 AM CDT, Bill Somerville
<g4...@classdesign.com> wrote:
Hi Mike,
I was think about the TCP/IP connection to the rig, the rig_close() needs to
shutdown and close that rather than be still waiting. In that case the close
should be processed promptly. I don't have a FlexRadio or any other network
connected rig.
Another question, what happens when rigctld is not included? I ask because
direct control must appear to behave exactly the same as indirect control via
rigctld, if that is not he case then there is a more serious issue there.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
On 24/04/2020 04:21, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Via the rigctld interface would be the "q" command getting sent by WSJT-X
via rig_close()...but the rigctld thread would be locked by the mutex while
it's still waiting for response from the rig.
But the "q" is fire-and-forget so WSJT-X could still close the port which may
solve the problem with the invalid configuration.
static int netrigctl_close(RIG *rig) { rig_debug(RIG_DEBUG_VERBOSE, "%s
called\n", __func__);
/* clean signoff, no read back */ write_block(&rig->state.rigport,
"q\n", 2);
return RIG_OK; }
Did you try and duplicate this by turning off your rig?
Mike
On Thursday, April 23, 2020, 06:49:50 PM CDT, Bill Somerville
<g4...@classdesign.com> wrote:
Hi Mike,
are we dealing with a long wait for the TCP/IP connection to close down? IIRC
if the client end initiates the shutdown of a TCP/IP connection there should be
minimum delay. rig_close() will have been called before rig_open() is called
again on the same RIG handle.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
On 23/04/2020 22:20, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Actually I just repeated it. Has to do with the timeout.....using
rigctld....or any network-based rig. So if the rig takes too long to
respond...then you get the timeout...the rig wakes up again...you click the
Retry and get invalid configuration because the rig is till open.
You may be able to duplicate this by turning off your rig, wait for the
timeout, and turn it back on, then click Retry.
de Mike W9MDB
On Thursday, April 23, 2020, 04:10:51 PM CDT, Black Michael via
wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
Don't have any more details than the error message of invalid
configuration.
I've seen it on my system too once in a while but never repeatable of course.
I think it may have to do with WSJT-X opening a 2nd connection without
closing the 1st connection as I saw some of that in recent debug logs.
I do notice that do_start does not ensure that the rig is closed
int HamlibTransceiver::do_start () { TRACE_CAT ("HamlibTransceiver",
QString::fromLatin1 (rig_->caps->mfg_name).trimmed () <<
QString::fromLatin1 (rig_->caps->model_name).trimmed ());
error_check (rig_open (rig_.data ()), tr ("opening connection to rig"));
Mike
On Thursday, April 23, 2020, 02:40:48 PM CDT, Bill Somerville
<g4...@classdesign.com> wrote:
On 23/04/2020 20:15, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
> And sometimes doing retry will give a configuration error too which
> requires a restart of WSJT-X...also undesirable.
>
> Mike
Hi Mike,
that's the first report of that, can you supply more details please?
73
Bill
G4WJS.
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
