app_timer2 app_timer_v2 implementation

[SL06]

I have read that you can save RAM with the newer implementation, so I decide to go ahead and change my code.  The SDK 16 migration guide says:

< To replace app_timer v1 with app_timer v2 in your existing project, you must add files app_timer2.c and drv_rtc.c in place of the app_timer.c file. You must also add an APP_TIMER_V2 define to the project. >

 May be those instructions are enough for more experience programmer, but it was not enough for me.   After reading all the available post on the subject, I have found that in the preprocessor definition, you have to add also :APP_TIMER_V2_RTC1_ENABLED  with the APP_TIMER_V2 definition.

You also have to include the preprocessor include directory  (for app_timer2.c)

../../../../../../components/libraries/atomic_fifo

../../../../../../components/libraries/sortlist

nrf_sortlist.c add also to be included in the program.

I hope that will save precious times to others.

Cheers S.

[Jørgen Holmefjord]

Hi,

Thank you for reporting your finding, I'm sure it will be helpful for others.

Best regards,
Jørgen

[Allen]

Which SDK version are you using? It is my understanding that app_timer2 is the default implementation for SDK16.

[Jørgen Holmefjord]

In SDK 16.0.0, app_timer2 is used by default in the examples, but if you are migrating an existing project from a previous SDK version, you need to add the changes to your project in order to use app_timer2.

[Dipak]

Thanks for the details this is very helpful!

make sure NRF_SORTLIST_ENABLED 1 is also enabled in sdk_config.h file  

[kobyatom]

thank you all the contributors for allowing me to switch to app_timer2.

Is there a known issue with app_timer.c in terms of concurrency? is it possible for the timer queue to get corrupted using app_timer.c? I think there is a slight lack of concurrent access protection, between app_timer_start/stop and the SWI handler.