pairing bonding fail

RE: pairing bonding fail

Simonr — Mon, 11 Apr 2022 06:50:10 GMT

Okay, thank you for explaining. I think you could create two whitelists for the two separate classes for example. I assume the class A/B devices respectively have something in common with each other, like device names or a UUID/service for instance. This can be used to add the devices into one "group" I guess, as they will each be part of one whitelist.

Best regards,

Simon

RE: pairing bonding fail

Abner — Fri, 08 Apr 2022 08:45:35 GMT

Hi,

Sorry for not expressing clearly.

There are three classes of devices in my system，one is BLE master, another is BLE slave whose name is "SLAVE_CLASS_A" we can call it class A device, and the last one is also BLE slave but whose name is "SLAVE_CLASS_B" we can call it class B device.The master can connect up to four class A devices and four class B devices at the same time,in this way, the master will record at most eight devices bonding information.When the master has stored the bonding information of four class A devices and four class B devices, when another new class A device arrives, the master must delete the earliest recorded of class A device bonding information.

So the problem I need to solve is that I must know whether the bonding record stored in the FLASH belongs to a class A device or a class B device, and the order in which the records are stored.

The SDK version i used is 17.0.2.

RE: pairing bonding fail

Simonr — Fri, 08 Apr 2022 07:49:11 GMT

I might be misunderstanding your latest question, but what do you mean by "recorded up to 4" here? If you're only bonding to two devices, why would you record up to 4 "types" of bonding info, and how would this record ever exceed 4? Sorry if I'm not understanding what you're trying to do, but please try explaining in detail what exactly you mean here.

What SDK version are you using? I think the peer manager storage data section should be helpful for storing data using the peer manager.

Best regards,

Simon

RE: pairing bonding fail

Abner — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 10:04:24 GMT

Hi,

Thanks, I got it.I have added the function pm_peer_delete();on both the maser side and the slave side to prevent either side from deleting the bonding information and causing the connection to fail.

In the current project, I have another function that needs to be implemented.The master needs to record the bonding information of two types of devices.The bonding information of each type of device can be recorded up to 4.When the bonding information of a certain type of device exceeds 4,according to the principle of first-in, first-out, delete the earliest record of this type of device.

Currently I'm reading the code of the peer_manager module, which does a lot of the pairing bonding and information storage work.I am not sure whether I should intervene in the record key before the peer_manager module writes the bonding information to the flash, or use FDS to record the bonding information to facilitate operations such as later deletion.

If you have better suggestions or comments, please let me know, thank you.

RE: pairing bonding fail

Simonr — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 09:18:22 GMT

Indeed, if only one of the devices delete the bonding information, the two devices won't be able to connect again until both delete the peer data. I think the easiest way around this would be to make the peripherals run a pm_peer_delete(); function if it fails to connect to the central X amount of times, or just delete bonding upon disconnections.

Best regards,

Simon