SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

fuzhongping — Mon, 04 Mar 2019 09:28:05 GMT

Hi,Andreas

the problem was solved. it was caused by a wrong pointer use by me.

thank you for your help.

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

AndreasF — Mon, 04 Mar 2019 09:08:03 GMT

Hi.

I don't spot anything wrong with the code.

[quote user="fuzhongping"]bacause of the project is the sample project of nRF5_SDK_12.3.0_d7731ad_original\examples\ble_peripheral\ble_app_uart\pca10028\s130\arm5_no_packs,with minimal additional code as shown about.so i was little doubt about the settings of IRAM1 that start at 0x20001FE8 and size=0x6018(24k) it is out of the maximum of nRF5_SDK_1251801 RAM space(16k).[/quote]

You can check step 5. in this tutorial which demonstrates how you set up correct addresses

Best regards,

Andreas

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

fuzhongping — Fri, 01 Mar 2019 11:12:43 GMT

Hi Andreas,
mycode is :
   static uint8_t tmpHead = 0;
   UNUSED_VARIABLE(app_uart_get(&tmpRxByte));
   UartRes.RxData[UartRes.RxDataLen++] = tmpRxByte;
   //app_uart_put(tmpRxByte);

   if(UartRes.RxExpectedLen == 0)
   {
       if( (UartRes.RxData[0] != UART_PROTOCOL_TAG_CMD) && (UartRes.RxData[0] != UART_PROTOCOL_TAG_DATA) )
       {
           UartRes.RxDataLen = 0;
           UartRes.RxExpectedLen = 0;
           break;
       }
       if(UartRes.RxDataLen >= UART_FRAME_HEAD_SIZE)
       {
           tmpHead = UartRes.RxData[0];
           UartRes.RxExpectedLen = UartRes.RxData[1]*256 +UartRes.RxData[2];
           if(UartRes.RxExpectedLen > UART_PAYLOAD_SIZE)
           {
               UartRes.RxDataLen = 0;
               UartRes.RxExpectedLen = 0;
               break;
           }
       }
   }
   else
   {
       if(UartRes.RxDataLen >= UartRes.RxExpectedLen + UART_FRAME_HEAD_SIZE)
       {

           if(tmpHead != UartRes.RxData[0])
           {
               printf("error\n"); /*Breakpoint*/
           }

           UartRxNeedToProcFlag = 1;

           //break;
       }
   }

now i found that if i set a breakpoint at /*Breakpoint*/,then the debug will stop at that line which mean the value of UartRes.RxData[0] has been changed.it looks like some pointer operations out of bounds.
bacause of the project is the sample project of nRF5_SDK_12.3.0_d7731ad_original\examples\ble_peripheral\ble_app_uart\pca10028\s130\arm5_no_packs,with minimal additional code as shown about.so i was little doubt about the settings of IRAM1 that start at 0x20001FE8 and size=0x6018(24k) it is out of the maximum of nRF5_SDK_1251801 RAM space(16k).

could you help me that check the settings are correct?

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

AndreasF — Fri, 01 Mar 2019 10:24:35 GMT

Hi.

There could be some timing issue maybe? What do you do in the "logical judgement"? Can you please share some code? :-)

Best regards,

Andreas

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

AndreasF — Fri, 01 Mar 2019 10:23:15 GMT

Hi.

There could be some timing issue maybe? What do you do in the "logical judgement"? Can you please share some code? :-)

Best regards,

Andreas

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

fuzhongping — Fri, 01 Mar 2019 08:33:18 GMT

Hi Andreas,
Thank you for your reply.
In my routine,for protocol analysis,i have to check every byte and do some logical judgement.
my test routine in uart_event_handle{case APP_UART_DATA_READY} is like:
case A:
{
   uint8_t tmpRxByte;
   UNUSED_VARIABLE(app_uart_get(&tmpRxByte));
   app_uart_put(tmpRxByte);
   ...do my logical judgement...
}

case B:
{
   uint8_t tmpRxByte;
   UNUSED_VARIABLE(app_uart_get(&tmpRxByte));
   ...do my logical judgement...
   app_uart_put(tmpRxByte);
}

in case A i will receive the data that i was sent.
in case B the received data will part missing sometimes.

even if i change the baudrate from 115200 to 19200,the missing is still in case B.
but in SDK 9.0.0, the same routine is works well.

why the difference occurs between case A and case B?
how can i do in case B for fix problem?

RE: SDK problem on nRF51801QCAB

AndreasF — Thu, 28 Feb 2019 12:56:32 GMT

Hi.

Answers to your questions:

If you look at the nRF51 Series IC revisions compatibility with SDK and SoftDevices list, you can see that you can use any of the IC rev 3 combinations.

So you can use SDK 12.3 with SoftDevice S130 v2.0.0

I think this happend because you are transmitting faster then you can handle the data on the RX side.

You have to either use flow controll or modify the driver so that it can handle the OVERRUN of data.

Best regards,

Andreas