SDK7.2.0 to SDK8.1.0 migration problems

[wim]

Hi

I thought: let us quickly migrate to the latest SDK. But that seems to be harder than anticipated. I run into a number issues when compiling with the new code:

• too few arguments in sd_ble_gatts_sys_attr_set : which flag should I use? I use this function call on a connect event, because I previously got a BLE_ERROR_GATTS_SYS_ATTR_MISSING error;

• too few arguments in sd_ble_gap_sec_params_reply

• ble_gap_evt_auth_status_t has no member perish_keys

• ble_gap_enc_info_t has no member div

• too few arguments in sd_ble_gap_sec_info_reply

• BLE_GAP_TIMEOUT_SRC_ADVERTISEMENT undeclared

Is there some guide explaining all these differences?

[Susheel Nuguru]

Please read the migration documents of SD8.0 version. All the answers to your questions are clearly explained there. For your convenience, I am attaching them here.

s110_nrf51_8.0.0_migration-document.pdf

[wim]

Aryan

thanks for the document. Question: is the LBS example and app note adapted accordingly? Or is there an example I could check, which does not need pairing or bonding or security?

Wim

[wim]

The reason for me asking: I am not using bonding, and in the release notes it says what to do in case of bonding, but not in the other case; should I make the pointers NULL in the sd_ble_gap_sec_params_reply? Or do I have to instantiate some dummy security parameters struct?

[Susheel Nuguru]

The LBS example is not adapted to latest SDK. But you can check ble_app_uart example which does not do any bonding.

sd_ble_gap_sec_params_reply(m_conn_handle, BLE_GAP_SEC_STATUS_PAIRING_NOT_SUPP, NULL, NULL);

[wim]

ok, clear; how about the sd_ble_gap_sec_info_reply - currently I have this code:

   case BLE_GAP_EVT_SEC_INFO_REQUEST:
        p_enc_info = &m_auth_status.periph_keys.enc_info;
        if (p_enc_info->div == p_ble_evt->evt.gap_evt.params.sec_info_request.div)
        {
            err_code = sd_ble_gap_sec_info_reply(m_conn_handle, p_enc_info, NULL);
            APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
        }
        else
        {
            // No keys found for this device
            err_code = sd_ble_gap_sec_info_reply(m_conn_handle, NULL, NULL);
            APP_ERROR_CHECK(err_code);
        }
        break;

How should I rewrite this? Should I just do

err_code = sd_ble_gap_sec_info_reply(m_conn_handle,NULL, NULL, NULL); ?