RE: nRF9160 disconnecting uart

JoEi — Wed, 13 Jul 2022 06:13:48 GMT

Hi Jonathan,

apparently I was a bit too fast with finding a solution.

The solution I found works fine at 115200 Baud but fails at higher ones like 1M Baud.
At 1M Baud the old version works perfectly fine.

I don't know why it behaves this different at different Baud rates.
Right now it seems that the best solution is a combination of both versions:

static void UartDrv_CheckUartErr(TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg, struct uart_event* evt)
{
  int iErr, iErr2 = 0;

  iErr = evt->data.rx_stop.reason;
  iErr2 = uart_err_check(psCfg->psDev);
  if(iErr || iErr2)
  {
    atomic_or(&psCfg->sFlags, UARTDRV_FLAG_RX_ERROR);
    psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RX);

    if(iErr & UART_BREAK || iErr2 & UART_BREAK)
      psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RXBREAK);
  }
}

Best regards,
Johannes

RE: nRF9160 disconnecting uart

JONATHAN LL — Fri, 08 Jul 2022 12:24:57 GMT

Thanks for updating with a solution :D

Regards,
Jonathan

RE: nRF9160 disconnecting uart

JoEi — Thu, 07 Jul 2022 15:03:59 GMT

I've found a solution for the strange behaviour.
It seems that getting the error reason with uart_err_check(...) is the problem.

So far my uart callback function looked like this:

static void UartDrv_CheckUartErr(TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg)
{
  int iErr;

  iErr = uart_err_check(psCfg->psDev);
  if(iErr)
  {
    atomic_or(&psCfg->sFlags, UARTDRV_FLAG_RX_ERROR);
    psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RX);

    if(iErr & UART_BREAK)
      psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RXBREAK);
  }
}

static void UartDrv_RxDisabled(TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg)
{
  UartDrv_CheckUartErr(psCfg);

  if(atomic_get(&psCfg->sFlags) & UARTDRV_FLAG_HALF_DUPLEX)
    k_sem_give(&psCfg->sSemRxDisable);
}

/* UART Async callback, triggered within interrupt context */
static void UartDrv_UartCallback(const struct device* dev,
			  struct uart_event* evt,
			  void* user_data)
{
  TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg;

  psCfg = UartDrv_GetCfg(user_data);
  if(!psCfg)
    return;

  switch (evt->type) 
  {
    case UART_TX_DONE:
    {
      UartDrv_TxDone(psCfg);
      break;
    }
    case UART_TX_ABORTED:
    {
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_RDY:
    {
      UartDrv_RxReady(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_BUF_REQUEST:
    {
      UartDrv_RxBufRequest(psCfg);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_BUF_RELEASED:
    {
      UartDrv_RxBufReleased(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_DISABLED:
    {
      UartDrv_RxDisabled(psCfg);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_STOPPED:
    {
      UartDrv_CheckUartErr(psCfg);
      break;
    }
  }
}

I've made some minimal changes so that it now looks like this:

static void UartDrv_CheckUartErr(TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg, struct uart_event* evt)
{
  int iErr;

  iErr = evt->data.rx_stop.reason;
  if(iErr)
  {
    atomic_or(&psCfg->sFlags, UARTDRV_FLAG_RX_ERROR);
    psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RX);

    if(iErr & UART_BREAK)
      psCfg->pfEvent(UARTDRV_EV_RXBREAK);
  }
}

static void UartDrv_RxDisabled(TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg, struct uart_event* evt)
{
  UartDrv_CheckUartErr(psCfg, evt);

  if(atomic_get(&psCfg->sFlags) & UARTDRV_FLAG_HALF_DUPLEX)
    k_sem_give(&psCfg->sSemRxDisable);
}

/* UART Async callback, triggered within interrupt context */
static void UartDrv_UartCallback(const struct device* dev,
			  struct uart_event* evt,
			  void* user_data)
{
  TUartDrv_Cfg* psCfg;

  psCfg = UartDrv_GetCfg(user_data);
  if(!psCfg)
    return;

  switch (evt->type) 
  {
    case UART_TX_DONE:
    {
      UartDrv_TxDone(psCfg);
      break;
    }
    case UART_TX_ABORTED:
    {
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_RDY:
    {
      UartDrv_RxReady(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_BUF_REQUEST:
    {
      UartDrv_RxBufRequest(psCfg);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_BUF_RELEASED:
    {
      UartDrv_RxBufReleased(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_DISABLED:
    {
      UartDrv_RxDisabled(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
    case UART_RX_STOPPED:
    {
      UartDrv_CheckUartErr(psCfg, evt);
      break;
    }
  }
}

The major difference is that I now use evt->data.rx_stop.reason instead of uart_err_check.

RE: nRF9160 disconnecting uart

JoEi — Thu, 07 Jul 2022 12:35:12 GMT

Something I've observed was that UART_BREAK was recognised when I've established a connection with J-Mem.
When disconnecting J-Mem it stopped being recognised.