S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

Kenneth — Tue, 11 Dec 2018 21:03:50 GMT

In essence yes.

Kenneth

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

kpreiss — Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:17:54 GMT

Are you saying in my example, that the BLE connection will always have priority over the ANT channel because the BLE connection period is larger than the ANT channel period? If we made the ANT channel period larger than the BLE period, would the ANT channel have priority over BLE?

Thanks,

Kurt

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

Kenneth — Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:00:39 GMT

Hi Kurt,

What I am trying to say is that if you place this on a timeline, and BLE have a interval of 100ms and ANT of 16.937ms, then BLE would always get the 100ms period, while ANT would need to skip specific intervals that collide with the 100ms BLE period. However in this case ANT would still have 5 un-interrupted periods between each BLE period, so that would be pretty good overall for ANT.

If BLE use 24ms and ANT use 16.937ms, then ANT will collide much more frequently with BLE, and will need to overall skip more periods than when BLE is 100ms.

Have in mind here that each radio event (ANT and BLE) you may assume is ~5ms, which is why they will collide.

With "slowest" I mean the protocol that transmit with the longest period in time between transmissions.

Best regards,
Kenneth

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

kpreiss — Tue, 11 Dec 2018 14:49:17 GMT

HI Kenneth,

I don't understand your reply regarding the "slowest" interval wins scheduling. When we increased the BLE connection period from 24 msec to 100 msec, we saw far fewer RX FAIL events on the ANT interface. This would indicate the smaller connection period has precedence. By increasing the BLE connection period, the higher frequency ANT channel rate has priority.

Also how do I calculate how long it would take to send a 4 packet burst over the air assuming their are no retries?

Thanks,

Kurt

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

Kenneth — Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:08:22 GMT

Typically the "slowest" interval will win scheduling, since that radio event will be allowed to schedule and allocate it's required time in the future first. There is not really a good way to avoid this, other than to change interval, and/or the amount of data in each interval to reduce the occurance.

Best regards,
Kenneth

RE: S332 stack running concurrent BLE peripheral and ANT connections.

kpreiss — Fri, 07 Dec 2018 15:20:22 GMT

One more data point....Restricting the BLE peripheral connection interval to 100msec significantly reduced the number of EVENT_RX_FAIL events being observed on the ANT sniffer.