<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
The notification works on my devices, it only has a garbled per
mille character -- see attached screenshot. The same applies to the
mail version:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Poller timing is: on
Type | count | Utlztn | Time
| per s | [‰] | [ms]
---------------+--------+--------+---------
Poll:PRI Avg| 0.25| 0.119| 0.382
Peak| | 0.513| 0.678
---------------+--------+--------+---------
RxCan1[597] Avg| 0.01| 0.004| 0.021
Peak| | 0.000| 0.338
---------------+--------+--------+---------
RxCan1[59b] Avg| 0.01| 0.011| 0.053
Peak| | 0.000| 0.848
---------------+--------+--------+---------
Cmd:State Avg| 0.01| 0.002| 0.012
Peak| | 0.000| 0.120
===============+========+========+=========
Total Avg| 0.28| 0.135| 0.468</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
The encoding is a general issue. The character encoding for text
messages via V2/MP is quite old & clumsy, it's got an issue with
the degree celcius character as well. We previously tried to keep
all text messages within the SMS safe character set (which e.g. lead
to writing just "C" instead of "°C"). I'd say we should head towards
UTF-8 now. If we ever refit SMS support, we can recode on the fly.<br>
<br>
Regarding not seeing the notification on your phone:<br>
<br>
a) Check your notification subtype/channel filters on the module.
See
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://docs.openvehicles.com/en/latest/userguide/notifications.html#suppress-notifications">https://docs.openvehicles.com/en/latest/userguide/notifications.html#suppress-notifications</a><br>
<br>
b) Check your notification vehicle filters on the phone (menu on
notification tab): if you enabled the vehicle filter, it will add
the messages of not currently selected vehicles to the list only,
but not raise a system notification. (Applies to the Android App, no
idea about the iOS version)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 26.05.24 um 06:32 schrieb Michael
Geddes:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAH0p7uL1gqoh2dLvNf9Ze+TdugLG9EZ9YF4TKVcLxgJjS-c3wA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="auto">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm trying to finalise this now .. and one last thing is
that I don't get the report coming to my mobile. I'm using
the command:</div>
<div> <font face="monospace"> MyNotify.NotifyString("info",
"poller.report", buf.c_str());</font><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div>Where the buffer string is just the same as the report
output. Should I be using some other format or command?</div>
<div>I get "alert" types (like the ioniq5 door-open alert)
fine to my mobile.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Michael.</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 19 May 2024, 12:51
Michael Balzer via OvmsDev, <<a
href="mailto:ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> A builtin web UI for this seems a bit over the top.
Builtin web config pages should focus on user features, this
is clearly a feature only needed during/for the
development/extension of a vehicle adapter. Development
features in the web UI are confusing for end users.<br>
<br>
If persistent enabling/disabling is done by a simple config
command (e.g. "config set can poller.trace on"), that's also
doable by users.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Am 19.05.24 um 02:06 schrieb Michael Geddes:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="auto">
<div>I was so focused on how I calculated the value
that I totally missed that ‰ would be a better
description. I could also use the system 'Ratio'
unit... so % or ‰. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I'll make space to put 'Avg' on the
row. Was trying to limit the width for output on a
mobile. I agree it would make it easier to
understand.</div>
<div>Totals also makes sense.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div>Should I make this a configuration that can be
set on the web-page? I'd probably use a
configuration change notification so that the very
bit setting is sync'd with the 'configuration'
value.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>//.ichael</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 18 May
2024, 14:05 Michael Balzer, <<a
href="mailto:dexter@expeedo.de"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">dexter@expeedo.de</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>I'm not sure whether the 'max' should
be the maximum of the smoothed value.. or
the maximum of the raw value.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
It should normally be the maximum of the raw
value I think, the maximum of the smoothed
value cannot tell about how bad the processing
of an ID can become.<br>
<br>
The naming in the table is a bit confusing I
think. (besides: I've never seen "ave" as the
abbreviation for average)<br>
<br>
If I understand you correctly, "time ms per s"
is the time share in per mille, so something
in that direction would be more clear, and
"length ms" would then be "time [ms]".<br>
<br>
The totals for all averages in the table foot
would also be nice.<br>
<br>
Maybe "Ave" (or avg?) also should be placed on
the left, as the "peak" label now suggests
being the peak of the average.<br>
<br>
Btw, keep in mind, not all "edge" users /
testers are developers (e.g. the Twizy driver
I'm in contact with), collecting stats
feedback for vehicles from testers should be
straight forward. Maybe add a data/history
record, sent automatically on every
drive/charge stop when the poller tracing is
on?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Am 18.05.24 um 02:28 schrieb Michael
Geddes:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>You did say max/pead value. I also
halved the N for both.</div>
<div>I'm not sure whether the 'max' should
be the maximum of the smoothed value..
or the maximum of the raw value.</div>
<div>This is currently the raw-value
maximum. </div>
<div>The problem is that the middle column
is the maximum of the {{sum over 10s} /
(10*1000,000)</div>
<div>I could easily change the 'period' to
1s and see how that goes.. was just
trying to reduce the larger
calculations. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<font face="monospace">Usage: poller
[pause|resume|status|times|trace]</font>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
OVMS# poller time status<br>
Poller timing is: on<br>
Type | Count | Ave time |
Ave length<br>
| per s | ms per s |
ms <br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
Poll:PRI | 1.00| 0.559|
0.543<br>
peak | | 0.663|
1.528<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
Poll:SRX | 0.08| 0.009|
0.038<br>
peak | | 0.068|
0.146<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 RX[778] | 0.11| 0.061|
0.280<br>
peak | | 0.458|
1.046<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 RX[7a8] | 0.04| 0.024|
0.124<br>
peak | | 0.160|
0.615<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 TX[770] | 0.05| 0.004|
0.016<br>
peak | | 0.022|
0.102<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 TX[7a0] | 0.02| 0.002|
0.011<br>
peak | | 0.010|
0.098<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 TX[7b3] | 0.01| 0.001|
0.006<br>
peak | | 0.000|
0.099<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 TX[7e2] | 0.02| 0.002|
0.011<br>
peak | | 0.010|
0.099<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
CAN1 TX[7e4] | 0.08| 0.008|
0.048<br>
peak | | 0.049|
0.107<br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
Cmd:State | 0.00| 0.000|
0.005<br>
peak | | 0.000|
0.094</font><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri,
17 May 2024 at 15:26, Michael Geddes
<<a
href="mailto:frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>This is what I have now.</div>
<div>The one on the end is the one
MIchael B was after using an N of
32. (up for discussion).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The middle is the time spent in
that even t per second. It
accumulates times (in microseconds),
and then every 10s it stores it as
smoothed (N=16) value.</div>
<div>The Count is similar (except that
we store a value of '100' as 1 event
so it can be still integers and has
2 decimal places).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Every received poll does a
64bit difference to 32bit (for the
elapsed time) and 64bit comparison
(for end-of-period).</div>
<div>It also does 1x 32bit smoothing
and 2x 32bit adds.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Then at the end of a 10s period,
it will do a 64bit add to get the
next end-of-period value, as well as
the 2x 32bit smoothing calcs.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is from the Ioniq 5 so not
any big values yet. You can
certainly see how insignificant the
TX callbacks are.</div>
<div>I'll leave it on for when the car
is moving and gets some faster
polling.</div>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="monospace">OVMS# poll
time status<br>
Poller timing is: on<br>
Type | Count | Ave time
| Ave Length<br>
| per s | ms per s
| ms <br>
-------------+----------+-----------+-----------<br>
Poll:PRI | 1.00|
0.540| 0.539<br>
Poll:SRX | 0.03|
0.004| 0.017<br>
CAN1 RX[778] | 0.06|
0.042| 0.175<br>
CAN1 TX[770] | 0.04|
0.002| 0.008<br>
Cmd:State | 0.01|
0.001| 0.005</font><br>
</div>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="monospace">----------------------8<--------------------------------</font></div>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="monospace">Nice
smoothing class (forces N as a
power of 2):</font></div>
<div> constexpr unsigned
floorlog2(unsigned x)<br>
{<br>
return x == 1 ? 0 :
1+floorlog2(x >> 1);<br>
}<br>
/* Maintain a smoothed average
using shifts for division.<br>
* T should be an integer type<br>
* N needs to be a power of 2<br>
*/<br>
template <typename T, unsigned
N><br>
class average_util_t<br>
{<br>
private:<br>
T m_ave;<br>
public:<br>
average_util_t() : m_ave(0) {}<br>
static const uint8_t _BITS =
floorlog2(N);<br>
void add( T val)<br>
{<br>
static_assert(N == (1
<< _BITS), "N must be a power
of 2");<br>
m_ave = (((N-1) * m_ave) +
val) >> _BITS;<br>
}<br>
T get() { return m_ave; }<br>
operator T() { return m_ave; }<br>
};<br>
</div>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="monospace"><br>
</font></div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On
Thu, 16 May 2024 at 10:29, Michael
Geddes <<a
href="mailto:frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Thanks Michael,</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
My calculations give me
((2^32)-1) / (1000*1000*3600) =
only 1.2 hours of processing
time in 32bit. The initial
subtraction is 64bit anyway and
I can't see a further 64bit
addition being a problem. I have
the calculations being performed
in doubles at print-out where
performance is not really an
issue anyway. (Though apparently
doing 64 bit division is worse
than floating point).
<div><br>
<div>In addition</div>
<div>* I currently have this
being able to be turned on
and off and reset manually
(only do it when required).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>* For the lower volume
commands, the smoothed
average is not going to be
useful - the count is more
interesting for different
reasons.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>* The total time is quite
useful. Ie a high average
time doesn't matter if the
count is low. The things
that are affecting
performance are stuff with
high total time. Stuff which
is happening 100 times a
second needs to be a much
lower average than once a
second.</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>* A measure like
'time per minute/second'
and possibly count per
minute/seconds as a
smoothed average would
potentially be more
useful. (or in
addition?)</div>
<div>I think we could do
_that_ in a reasonably
efficient manner using a
64 bit 'last measured
time', a 32 bit
accumulated value and
the stored 32 bit
rolling average. </div>
<div>It would boils down
to some iterative
(integer) sums and
multiplications plus a
divide by n ^ (time
periods passed) - which
is a shift - and which
can be optimised to '0'
if 'time-periods-passed'
is more than
32/(bits-per-n) -
effectively limiting the
number of iterations.</div>
<div>The one issue I can
see is that we need to
calculate 'number of
time-periods passed'
which is a 64 bit
subtraction followed by
a 32 bit division (not
optimisable to a simple
shift).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>* I'm also happy to keep
a rolling (32bit) average
time.<br>
</div>
<div> Even if you assume
averages in the 100ms, 32bit
is going to happily support
an N of 64 or even 128.</div>
<div>
<div>
<div> Am I right in
thinking that the choice
of N is highly dependent
on frequency. For things
happening 100 times per
second, you might want
an N like 128.. where
things happening once
per</div>
<div> second, you might
want an N of 4 or 8.
The other things we keep
track of in this manner
we have a better idea of
the frequency of the
thing.<br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>How about we have (per
record type):</div>
<div> * total count (since
last reset?) (32 bit)</div>
<div> * smoothed average of
time per instance (32 bit)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> * ?xx? total
accumulated time since last
reset (64bit) ?? <-- with
the below stats this is much
less useful</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> * last-measured-time
(64 bit) </div>
<div> * accumulated count
since last time-period
(16bit - but maybe 32bit
anyway for byte alignment?)</div>
<div> * smoothed average of
count per time-period
(32bit)<br>
</div>
<div> * accumulated time
since last time-period
(32bit)</div>
<div> * smoothed average of
time per time-period (32bit)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It's possible to keep
the </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is this going to be too
much per record type? The
number of 'records' we are
keeping is quite low (so 10
to 20 maybe) - so it's not a
huge memory burden.<br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thoughts?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
//.ichael<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 16
May 2024 at 03:09, Michael
Balzer via OvmsDev <<a
href="mailto:ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> esp_timer_get_time() is
the right choice for
precision timing.<br>
<br>
I'd say uint32 is enough
though, even if counting
microseconds that can hold a
total of more than 71 hours
of actual processing time.
uint64 has a significant
performance penalty,
although I don't recall the
overhead for simple
additions.<br>
<br>
Also & more important,
the average wouldn't be my
main focus, but the maximum
processing time seen per ID,
which seems to be missing in
your draft.<br>
<br>
Second thought on the
average… the exact overall
average really has a minor
meaning, I'd rather see the
current average, adapting to
the current mode of
operation (drive/charge/…).
I suggest feeding the
measurements to a low pass
filter to get the smoothed
average of the last n
measurements. Pattern:<br>
<br>
runavg = ((N-1) * runavg +
newval) / N<br>
<br>
By using a low power of 2
for N (e.g. 8 or 16), you
can replace the division by
a simple bit shift, and have
enough headroom to use 32
bit integers.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Am 15.05.24 um 06:51
schrieb Michael Geddes via
OvmsDev:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Formatting
aside, I have
implemented what I think
Michael B was
suggesting. This is a
sample run on the Ioniq
5 (which doesn't have
unsolicited RX events).
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This uses the
call esp_timer_get_time()
got get a 64bit <b>microseconds</b>
since started value -
and works out the time
to execute that way.
It's looking at
absolute time and not
time in the Task - so
other things going on
at the same time in
other tasks will have
an effect. (The
normal tick count
doesn't have nearly
enough resolution to
be useful - any other
ideas on measurement?)
I've got total
accumulated time
displaying in seconds
and the average in
milliseconds currently
- but I can change
that easy enough.</div>
<div>The cumulative time
is stored as uint64_t
which will be plenty,
as 32bit wouldn't be
nearly enough.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font
face="monospace">OVMS#
<b>poller time on</b><br>
Poller timing is
now on<br>
</font>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font
face="monospace">OVMS#
<b>poller time
status</b><br>
Poller timing
is: on<br>
Poll [PRI]
: n=390
tot=0.2s
ave=0.586ms<br>
Poll [SRX]
: n=316
tot=0.1s
ave=0.196ms<br>
CAN1 RX[0778]
: n=382
tot=0.2s
ave=0.615ms<br>
CAN1 RX[07a8]
: n=48
tot=0.0s
ave=0.510ms<br>
CAN1 RX[07bb]
: n=162
tot=0.1s
ave=0.519ms<br>
CAN1 RX[07ce]
: n=33
tot=0.0s
ave=0.469ms<br>
CAN1 RX[07ea]
: n=408
tot=0.2s
ave=0.467ms<br>
CAN1 RX[07ec]
: n=486
tot=0.2s
ave=0.477ms<br>
CAN3 RX[07df]
: n=769
tot=0.2s
ave=0.261ms<br>
CAN1 TX[0770]
: n=191
tot=0.0s
ave=0.054ms<br>
CAN1 TX[07a0]
: n=16
tot=0.0s
ave=0.047ms<br>
CAN1 TX[07b3]
: n=31
tot=0.0s
ave=0.069ms<br>
CAN1 TX[07c6]
: n=11
tot=0.0s
ave=0.044ms<br>
CAN1 TX[07e2]
: n=82
tot=0.0s
ave=0.067ms<br>
CAN1 TX[07e4]
: n=54
tot=0.0s
ave=0.044ms<br>
Set State
: n=7
tot=0.0s
ave=0.104ms<br>
</font><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>This is probably
going to be quite
useful in general!
The TX call-backs
don't seem to be
significant here.
(oh, I should
probably implement a
reset of the values
too).</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>//.ichael</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail_attr">On
Sun, 12 May 2024 at
22:58, Michael Geddes
<<a
href="mailto:frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Yeah
- I certainly
wasn't going to
put a hard limit.
Just a log above a
certain time, that
being said, the
idea of just
collecting stats
(being able to
turn it on via a
"poller timer" set
of commands) would
be much more
useful. I'll look
into that.</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Average time
is probably a
good stat - and
certainly what
we care about.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I actually am
hopeful that
those couple of
things I did
might help
reduce that
average time
quite a bit
(that
short-cutting
the isotp
protocol
handling
especially). </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That p/r with
logging changes
might help
reduce the
unproductive log
time further,
but also makes
it possible to
turn on the
poller logging
without the RX
task logs
kicking in.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>//.ichael</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 12 May 2024 at 22:29, Michael Balzer via
OvmsDev <<a
href="mailto:ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> Warning /
gathering
debug
statistics
about slow
processing can
be helpful,
but there must
not be a hard
limit.
Frame/poll
response
processing may
need disk or
network I/O,
and the
vehicle task
may be
starving from
punctual high
loads on
higher
priority tasks
(e.g.
networking) or
by needing to
wait for some
semaphore --
that's outside
the
application's
control, and
must not lead
to
termination/recreation
of the task
(in case
you're heading
towards that
direction).<br>
<br>
I have no idea
how much
processing
time the
current
vehicles
actually need
in their
respective
worst cases.
Your draft is
probably too
lax, poll
responses and
frames
normally need
to be
processed much
faster. I'd
say 10 ms is
already too
slow, but any
wait for a
queue/semaphore
will already
mean at least
10 ms
(FreeRTOS
tick).
Probably best
to begin with
just
collecting
stats.<br>
<br>
Btw, to help
in narrowing
down the
actual problem
case, the
profiler could
collect max
times per RX
message ID.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Am
12.05.24 um
10:41 schrieb
Michael
Geddes:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I have a
question for
Michael B (or
whoever) - I
have a commit
lined up that
would add a
bit of a time
check to the
poller loop.
What do we
expect the
maximum time
to execute a
poller loop
command should
be? </div>
<div>This is a
rough idea (in
ms) I have..
based on
nothing much
really, so any
ideas would be
appreciated:<br>
</div>
<div> int
TardyMaxTime_ms(OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType
entry_type)<br>
{<br>
switch
(entry_type)<br>
{<br>
case
OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType::Poll:
return 80;<br>
case
OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType::FrameRx:
return 30;<br>
case
OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType::FrameTx:
return 20;<br>
case
OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType::Command:
return 10;<br>
case
OvmsPoller::OvmsPollEntryType::PollState:
return 15;<br>
default:
return 80;<br>
}<br>
}<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>//.ichael<br>
</div>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 07:45, Michael Geddes <<a
href="mailto:frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">frog@bunyip.wheelycreek.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div
dir="auto">I
realise that I
was only using
the standard
cable to test
- which
probably is
not sufficient
- I haven't
looked closely
at how the
Leaf OBD to
Db9 cable is
different from
standard.<br>
</div>
<div
dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div
dir="auto">Ah,
my bad out the
queue length.
We are
definitely
queueing more
messages
though. From
my log of when
the overflow
happened, the
poller was in
state 0 which
means OFF - ie
nothing was
being sent!!</div>
<div
dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div
dir="auto">I'll
look at the TX
message thing
- opt in
sounds good -
though it
shouldn't be
playing that
much of a part
here as the
TXs are
infrequent in
this case (or
zero when the
leaf is off
or driving) -
On the ioniq 5
when I'm using
the HUD - I'm
polling quite
frequently -
multiple times
per second and
that seems to
be fine!.</div>
<div
dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div
dir="auto">I
did find an
issue with the
throttling ..
but it would
still mostly
apply the
throttling
where it
matters, so
again, it
shouldn't be
the problem
(also, we
aren't
transmitting
in the leaf
case).</div>
<div
dir="auto">
<div
dir="auto">
<div
dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div
dir="auto">The
change I made
to the logging
of RX messages
showed how
many in a row
were
dropped... and
it was mostly
1 only in a
run - which
means even if
it is a short
time between -
that means
that the drops
are being
interleaved by
at least one
success!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sooo..
I'm still
wondering what
is going on.
Some things
I'm going to
try:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>* If the
number of
messages on
the Can bus
(coming in
through RX)
means that the
queue is
slowly getting
longer and not
quite catching
up, then
making the
queue longer
will help it
last longer...
but only
pushes the
problem down
the road.</div>
<div> - Add
'current queue
length' to the
poller status
information to
see if this is
indeed the
case? </div>
<div> - Add
some kind of
alert when the
queue reaches
a % full?</div>
<div>* Once
you start
overflowing
and getting
overflow log
messages, I
wonder if this
is then
contributing
to the
problem.</div>
<div> - Push
the overflow
logging into
Poller Task
which can look
at how many
drops occurred
since last
received item.</div>
<div>* Split
up the flags
for the poller
messages into
2:<br>
</div>
<div> -
Messages that
are/could be
happening in
the TX/RX
tasks</div>
<div> -
Other noisy
messages that
always happen
in the poller
task.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thoughts
on what else
we might
measure to
figure out
what is going
on?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>//.ichael</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 5 May 2024, 19:29 Michael Balzer via OvmsDev,
<<a
href="mailto:ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ovmsdev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> Michael,<br>
<br>
the queue size
isn't in
bytes, it's in
messages:<br>
<br>
<blockquote
type="cite"><font
face="monospace"> * @param uxQueueLength The maximum number of items
that the queue
can contain.<br>
*<br>
* @param
uxItemSize The
number of
bytes each
item in the
queue will
require.</font></blockquote>
<br>
Also, from the
time stamps in
Dereks log
excerpt, there
were quite
some dropped
frames in that
time window --
at least 23
frames in 40
ms, that's
bad.<br>
<br>
Queue sizes
are currently:<br>
<br>
<font
face="monospace">CONFIG_OVMS_HW_CAN_RX_QUEUE_SIZE=60<br>
CONFIG_OVMS_VEHICLE_CAN_RX_QUEUE_SIZE=60</font><br>
<br>
The new poller
now channels
all TX
callbacks
through the
task queue
additionally
to RX and
commands. So
setting the
queue size to
be larger than
the CAN RX
queue size
seems
appropriate.<br>
<br>
Nevertheless,
an overflow
with more than
60 waiting
messages still
indicates some
too long
processing
time in the
vehicle task.<br>
<br>
TX callbacks
previously
were done
directly in
the CAN
context, and
no current
vehicle
overrides the
empty default
handler, so
this imposed
almost no
additional
overhead. By
requiring a
queue entry
for each TX
callback, this
feature now
has a
potentially
high impact
for all
vehicles. If
passing these
to the task is
actually
necessary, it
needs to
become an
opt-in
feature, so
only vehicles
subscribing to
the callback
actually need
to cope with
that
additional
load &
potential
processing
delays
involved.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<blockquote
type="cite">
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div
class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div
lang="EN-AU">
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<div
style="border:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:7pt"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
OvmsDev mailing
list<br>
<a
href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
OvmsDev mailing list
<a href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>
<a href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
OvmsDev mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26</pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
OvmsDev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26</pre>
</body>
</html>