[Ovmsdev] Crash / reboot loop with log level Info

[Greg D.]

Excellent.  Change pushed to my fork; pull request created.

Thanks!

Greg


Michael Balzer wrote:
> I second that, the normal stack usage for the Housekeeper is already quite close to 4K:
>
> Number of Tasks = 19       Stack:  Now   Max Total    Heap 32-bit SPIRAM
> Task 3FFD3718 14 Housekeeping      356  3396  4096   91940      0      0
>
> So I also think 6K should be the default.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
>
> Am 26.02.2018 um 08:54 schrieb Stephen Casner:
>> Greg,
>>
>> Presuming that you are not doing some activity in the Housekeeping
>> task that should really be done in some other task, and presuming that
>> the activity you are doing is not something unreasonable, then indeed
>> you have found a valid need for a larger stack and the change should
>> be committed.  The value 6144 is a reasonable step up.
>>
>>                                                         -- Steve
>>
>> On Sun, 25 Feb 2018, Greg D. wrote:
>>
>>> Ha, yes.  Sorry.  I bumped it up to 6144 (seems like a popular value),
>>> and that fixed it.
>>>
>>> So, two questions:
>>> 1.  What should a proper value be?  I used 6144 only because I'd seen it
>>> used elsewhere.
>>> 2.  Shall I push this for permanence?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>> Stephen Casner wrote:
>>>> Greg,
>>>>
>>>> It sounds to me like you are conflating stack overflow with running
>>>> out of heap space.  You are not having a problem (yet) of running out
>>>> of heap space, you have a stack size that is configured too small for
>>>> your program's requirements.  From what I saw in your earlier message,
>>>> you need to change the creation of the Housekeeping task to specify a
>>>> larger stack.
>>>>
>>>>                                                         -- Steve
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 25 Feb 2018, Greg D. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see any evidence that there is a recursive loop here, just the
>>>>> buffers stacking up, causing the overflow.  Odd, though, this used to
>>>>> work.  Not sure what else changed at that time besides the logging
>>>>> level; if I recall, it was part of a larger update.
>>>>>
>>>>> But given that we have a RAM fix coming, is it worth messing with this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephen Casner wrote:
>>>>>> Greg,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless there is a bug causing infinite recursion or something, you may
>>>>>> have sufficient free RAM to allow increasing the size of the stack for
>>>>>> the task that is getting the stack overflow and achieve successful
>>>>>> operation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                                                         -- Steve
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
>>>>>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
>>>>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
>>>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OvmsDev mailing list
>>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
>>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OvmsDev mailing list
>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev