• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 18 replies
  • Subscribers 75 subscribers
  • Views 3104 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Attachments (1) Download All
Nordic Case Info
  • Case ID: 306549
Options

The AT+CFUN=0 take long time sometimes

Tim Chao

Hi,

I am developing a low-power device to periodically publish data.

I need to turn off the modem after the publishing task is completed.

And I found that sometimes the AT+CFUN=0 takes a long time to get response.

Below is the code piece for turn-off the modem.

// turn-off modem ~
int64_t start = k_uptime_get();
err = lte_lc_power_off();
int64_t end = k_uptime_get();
LOG_DBG("AT+CFUN=0 done (%5llu ms)", end - start);

And here are some logs I got.

[00:11:31.559,295] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  707 ms)
[00:12:35.537,811] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done ( 3034 ms)
[00:14:09.772,918] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (37793 ms)
[00:15:29.533,721] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  651 ms)
[00:17:45.127,807] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (33883 ms)
[00:18:04.649,200] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  681 ms)
[00:18:32.629,821] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  745 ms)
----
[00:22:01.609,619] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done ( 3701 ms)
[00:23:00.044,921] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  747 ms)
[00:24:01.036,315] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done ( 1497 ms)
[00:25:39.506,195] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (40664 ms)
[00:26:47.982,025] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (41370 ms)
[00:27:14.052,673] <dbg> modem: modem_power_off: AT+CFUN=0 done (  733 ms)


You can see that sometimes it takes more than 30 seconds to finish.

Is this normal behavior?

PS. I am using NCS 2.3.0 with Modem FW 1.3.3

Parents Reply
  • 0 in reply to Achim Kraus

    Thanks, you help me to clear another question.

    I did notice that short power on/off interval may cause the modem stay in SEARCHING state for a long time (>10 mins) sometime. I think it may be a limitation, but not sure is limited modem or operator. I will not allow such short interval in final product.

    The 1~2 minutes in previous log is just for getting more logs of this power-off time test. Increase the interval did not change result.

Children
  • 0 in reply to Tim Chao

    In my experience PSM works with NB-IoT in many cases. Also RAI (either CP- or AS-RAI) works pretty well, maybe not perfect, but well.

    For LTE-M it isn't that easy. First PSM without RAI is only "half the story" and for LTE-M RAI comes with Rel 14 AS-RAI. Second sometimes, in old infrastructure, you may get connected to LTE (not LTE-M) and then PSM is missing.

    Anyway, I go for PSM and in the left cases, where PSM isn't available, a limited off/on approach as fallback.

    My experience with eDRX support isn't that good, therefore I postponed to use it. (In my use-case the calculation doubles energy consumption, so it hasn't that prio.)

  • 0 in reply to Achim Kraus

    Thanks for your sharing.

    May I ask how you check if PSM is available?

    I am wondering if check the <Active-Time> and <TAU> value in +CEREG notification enough, or I need to monitor the "Enter sleep" event to make sure the PSM works.

  • 0 in reply to Tim Chao

    I record the most events to ensure, what actually happens. That includes the events RRC Connected, RRC Idle and Sleeping events. I also add the times and relate these event times with the time of the last sent or received data.

    Time "last data" to RRC Idle indicates the RRC Active Timer or effective RAI function.

    Time "RRC Idle" to "Sleeping" indicates in a couple of cases extra HPPLMN searches (among other cases, so this is not really that clear).

    In some other discussion I also requested more events, which reports the actual situation. Last week we tried to discus reporting about RAI . Unfortunately it seems the for Nordic the "best possible way" is to swallow requested functions and not to report the outcome. That is extremely time intensive on the user's side. Especially, if you consider that from time to time Nordic "breaks" the behavior. The same happens for events about HPPLMN searches, for Nordic this is not required, and for users this extra drains the battery.

  • 0 in reply to Achim Kraus

    Many thanks.

    I really learn a lot from your sharing.

  • 0 in reply to Tim Chao
    Tim Chao said:

    May I ask how you check if PSM is available?

    I am wondering if check the <Active-Time> and <TAU> value in +CEREG notification enough, or I need to monitor the "Enter sleep" event to make sure the PSM works.

    If you have an Active-Time (i.e. it is not "1110000"), you have PSM, and you can see the sleep period in the TAU parameter.

Related
Terms of service