Disable SD stops ALL RTCs and/or LFCLK?

[mectronicsinc]

Hi all,

I got strange behavior: when I disable the SoftDevice (nRF52832, S132 V3.0, SDK 12.2) seem that ALL the RTCs, not just the one used by the SD, are stopped, and also the LFCLK are stopped.

This behavior, of course (why?) do not occours when I'm debugging.

Here my code:

void Ble_DeInit(void)
{
uint8_t sd_enabled;
uint32_t err_code;
sd_softdevice_is_enabled(&sd_enabled);

if(ble_state != Ble_State_SD_Disabled){

    Ble_Set_Connectability(OFF);

    do{
        Ble_Task();
    }while(Ble_Flags.set_connectability != 0 && Ble_Flags.reset_connectability != 0 && ble_state != Ble_State_Idle);
    }

    if(sd_enabled)
    {
    err_code = softdevice_handler_sd_disable(); // ~ -125uA
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
    Ble_Flags.is_sd_active = 0;
    }

    /* softdevice_handler_sd_disable disables the lfclk (?): re-enable */
    nrf_drv_clock_uninit();     // to avoid the error
    err_code = nrf_drv_clock_init();
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
    nrf_drv_clock_lfclk_request(NULL); // ~ +60uA

    ble_state = Ble_State_NOT_INITIALIZED;
}

Any idea? Thanks!

[mectronicsinc]

Solved!

I changed my code as follow:

 void Ble_DeInit(void)
 {
 uint8_t sd_enabled;
 uint32_t err_code;
 sd_softdevice_is_enabled(&sd_enabled);

    if(ble_state != Ble_State_SD_Disabled){

         Ble_Set_Connectability(OFF);

        do{
            Ble_Task();
        }while(Ble_Flags.set_connectability != 0 && Ble_Flags.reset_connectability != 0 && ble_state != Ble_State_Idle);
    }

    if(sd_enabled)
    {
        err_code = softdevice_handler_sd_disable(); // ~ -125uA
        APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
        Ble_Flags.is_sd_active = 0;
    }

    if(!nrf_drv_clock_lfclk_is_running()){
         nrf_drv_clock_lfclk_request(NULL);

         // de-init and re-init RTC
         DateTime_Init_RTC();
    }

     ble_state = Ble_State_NOT_INITIALIZED;
 }

This is the body of DateTime_Init_RTC function:

    void DateTime_Init_RTC(void){

    if(DateTime_Flags.initialized){
        nrf_drv_rtc_tick_disable(DATETIME_RTC);
        nrf_drv_rtc_disable(DATETIME_RTC);
        nrf_drv_rtc_uninit(DATETIME_RTC);
    }

    // Setup RTC
    nrf_drv_rtc_config_t config;
    config.prescaler            = RTC_FREQ_TO_PRESCALER(DATETIME_RTC_FREQ_HZ);
    config.interrupt_priority   = DATETIME_RTC_IRQ_Priority;
    config.reliable             = RTC_DEFAULT_CONFIG_RELIABLE;
    config.tick_latency         = RTC_US_TO_TICKS(NRF_MAXIMUM_LATENCY_US, RTC_DEFAULT_CONFIG_FREQUENCY);
    uint32_t err_code           = nrf_drv_rtc_init(DATETIME_RTC, &config, DateTime_RTC_Handler);
    APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);

    //Enable tick event & interrupt
    nrf_drv_rtc_tick_enable(DATETIME_RTC, true);

    //Power on RTC instance
    nrf_drv_rtc_enable(DATETIME_RTC);

    datetime_tick_counter = 0;
}

[butch]

Now I am reading other posts and the code in nrf_drv_clock.c. See sd_state_evt_handler(). The clock driver is notified when the sd is disabled, and "releases" the LF clock. That means it decrements a count of users of the clock, and stops the clock if there are no more users. The question now is, doesn't app_timer qualify as a user of the LF clock? For you, the question is similar. Maybe "nrf_drv_clock_lfclk_request(NULL);" with a NULL handler does not increment the count of users/requesters?