-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 974
Fix: ESP32 KISS modem becomes permanently unresponsive under TX backpressure #2646
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
agessaman
wants to merge
3
commits into
meshcore-dev:dev
Choose a base branch
from
agessaman:fix/kiss-modem-esp32-usb-lockup
base: dev
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+75
−14
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just wondering if a better approach is to pre-calc the total frame length, then introduce a new method like:
bool canWriteFrame(size_t len);
And for logic to be:
writeFrame( ... ) {
size_t total_len = ... ;
if (!canWriteFrame(total_len)) return; // bail, all or nothing
_serial.write( ... ); ...
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was thinking about the same, but looks like those buffers are quite small (like 64 bytes in some cases). Need some sleep first, but its an interesting one to look into.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ViezeVingertjes any additional thoughts on this? Happy to make revisions following Scott's suggestion, but I wanted your feedback because the KISS firmware is your baby.
I can confirm that this change, plus a couple changes on the pyMC side have completely eliminated the lockup and unresponsive frame issues that we were facing (which is super exciting).
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think to remember
availableForWrite()is like only 64 or 128 bytes max depending on HWCDC/USBCDC, so now i wonder why it works haha! Does it drop all frames above it now making it look like it does because it does send smaller frames through?Sorry have been busy, will prioritize looking at it further today. 💯 Most important is that we dont drop/lose frames without the proper feedback to the client, otherwise it wouldnt know to retry etc. (Although no response is also an indicator i guess)