September 2015 - OvmsDev

OVMS logo
by Mark Webb-Johnson 06 Jun '17

06 Jun '17

We need to change the OVMS logo, to better reflect the vehicle independence. The existing logo is too much Tesla. Felix has kindly prepared a couple of options for us, attached below. My preference is for the one with the car outline (even though it retains a hint of Tesla), as it emphasizes the vehicle comms aspect. This is quite urgent, as the Teslive people are pushing for artwork. What do you guys/gals think? Regards, Mark

8 14

OVMS v3
by Mastro Gippo 20 May '17

20 May '17

Hi all, I'd like to resurrect an old conversation. As we know, the current PIC is quickly running out of resources and maybe it's time to switch to a better platform. Two CAN buses are now desirable too. A microSD slot and direct USB connectivity wouldn't hurt either. I will probably have to design a similar hardware for myself, so I'd like to contribute to the OVMS by sharing the HW platform if you want; no strings attached of course, if you decide that there's no need for the upgrade, I'll keep on working on my project by myself! :) That said, I'd like to throw a few ideas to the table. - MCU: I'd like to use an STM32 micro. They seem to be emerging as the standard choice for diy ARM projects, and this offers a few interesting opportunities: -Programming it in c/c++ with the manufacturer CMSIS standard libraries (boring) -Programming it with the mbed.org SDK. Unfortunately no dev boards are available with dual CAN bus, but it will be easy to move to the correct micro of the same series once most of the software is ironed out on a dev board like the https://mbed.org/platforms/ST-Nucleo-F302R8/ -Programming it with an RTOS. NuttX would be my choice, as it's the one used in the Ardupilot Pixhawk platform, and I'd like to learn it. This would mean a steeper starting curve, but a lot of flexibility later as a lot of stuff is handled on the OS level (network stacks, SD card & filesystems, multitasking...). FreeRTOS is a nice option too. I'd like to use the STM32F405RG as it's the most similar to the one found on the Pixhawk, but of course I'm biased because of that, and that micro is quite overkill for the task. We can of course use a lower specced part and lose some RTOS fuctionality as long as it has 2 CAN buses. - MODEM: I have no experience in this field; is the SIM908 still a good choice or does anyone think that we should try new platforms? I like this, but I don't know if the price puts it out of budget: http://www.telit.com/telit/Pulsar/en_US.Store.display.1001./ge864-gps On the bright side, it can be programmed in python, so we can offload some of the work to the modem. This *could* allow us to free some space on the PIC, and keep that platform without changing MCU.. - Enclosure: I think that, even with the new MCU, we can still fit the old enclosure. Is that ok, or should we think about a more automotive-friendly one? Maybe waterproof for the twizy? And that's it. I think that the core SW developers should voice their opinion, as there is a lot of work to be done on that front. A huge problem will be keeping backwards compatibility to add features for the v2 users, so we should discuss about this too. Regards MG

18 70

OVMS v2 stock / OVMS v3
by Mark Webb-Johnson 23 Feb '16

23 Feb '16

At the current rate, the batch we have of OVMS v2 modules will run out sometime in the next two months. Given the imminent shutdown of AT&T’s 2G network in USA, global re-allocation of 2G frequency bands, and the difficulties we are having obtaining the discontinued SIM908, it is decision time. Option #1: Re-order a large batch now, enough to last us into the new year, but with the risk that I’ll be personally stuck with them. Option #2: Just let the v2 modules run out, and move on with the plans for v3. Development on v2 is stagnating. Partly because the platform already does what we need it to do, and partly because we’re hitting the limits (no external connectivity other than GPRS, single CAN bus, no storage, limited RAM, flash, etc). The v3 plans have been on hold for some time, pending MBED OS release (first beta due this month) and the imminent release of hybrid processors such as that used in the UDOO Neo (due in September). We know what we want, but it is just too hard to pick a long-term platform when everything is on the cusp of changing. I really want a v3 module. Something with lots of RAM and Flash, wifi, bluetooth and cellular connectivity, multiple CAN bus support, and a rich development platform. Something we can all use as a platform for reverse engineering as well as end-user connectivity. I’ll do everything I can to make this a reality. Just not today. Too much is changing and we need to wait for things to stabilise. So, my gut feeling is to choose option #2. 2G GPRS is slowing dying, and building more on that platform just seems to be the wrong decision. This may leave us with several months of no platform stock, but I would rather people waited than spend $100 on something that is going to be obsolete/outdated. Kind of like buying an iPhone in August ;-) I don’t want to be stuck with the stock, and I don’t want people to buy a v2, only to have v3 come out a week later. Even if we started now, which we can’t, an optimistic schedule for the first end-user v3 units would be early 2016. So, tough decisions, but I really think option #2 is best. Bottom line is if you need v2 modules, order them now. If you are likely to need a large quantity for any upcoming projects, let me know. The SIM908 modules will be unavailable within the next month or so, and changing to another module is a PITA I don’t want to deal with (especially given the tight RAM and FLASH we have now). Regards, Mark.

14 37

Building with free C18 compiler
by Matt Beard 19 Nov '15

19 Nov '15

Have I missed a decision to no longer support the free C18 compiler - or has it been like that for ages? I am trying to fix an issue in the iMiev code, but can no longer build 2.6.5 due to needing the full compiler and no way am I paying £300 for it. Matt Beard

9 13

C2DM is deprecated, no new sign-ups
by Lee Howard 17 Nov '15

17 Nov '15

I've got my own OVMS server going. However, I wasn't seeing notifications on my phone (Android) since moving away from tmc.openvehicles.com. Looking at the ovms_server.pl code it appears that ovms_server.conf requires this section: [c2dm] email=<email> password=<password> accounttype=<unknown> [This "c2dm" section, along with the "server", "master", and "log" sections are undocumented in the docs/HOWTO.server.txt file.] Okay, so it would seem that I need to set-up a C2DM account with Google and put that info into the conf file. But, Google has deprecated C2DM in favour of Google Cloud Messaging (GCM), and Google is not granting any new C2DM accounts... http://developer.android.com/google/gcm/c2dm.html Is the C2DM account used by tmc.openvehicles.com a generic account that can be used by other OVMS servers? I suspect that it is a private account. If so, then push notifications for Android users on independent servers will necessarily require a transition to GCM. Thanks, Lee. -- *Lee Howard* *Mainpine, Inc. Chief Technology Officer* Tel: +1 866 363 6680 | Fax: +1 360 462 8160 lee.howard(a)mainpine.com | www.mainpine.com

4 10

Firmware 2.8.1
by Mark Webb-Johnson 27 Sep '15

27 Sep '15

I’ve built a firmware for 2.8.1. This includes all the changes since March 2014. Quite a few minor bug fixes and improvements. Most noticeable new work is parameter #0x16, GPRSDNS. This can be configured as the fourth parameter to the GPRS command, and specifies the DNS server. It seems that the gprs protocol allows the mobile providers to push DNS server IPs to us, and the SIM908 recognises and stores those. But, for those providers that don’t support that, this parameter allows it to be explicitly set. We can now use DNS names (tmc.openvehicles.com <http://tmc.openvehicles.com/>), instead of IP addresses, for the Server IP parameter. This is a much better way of doing it. I’ve also changed the COPS mechanism around a bit, to try to make it work better in marginal network conditions. In particular, in my garage ;-) The new logic is to wait for up to 5 minutes, after COPS fails, to see if we can get a network registration anyway. If we can, we continue with GPRS. If we can’t we try COPS again. This is a release candidate now. Regards, Mark.

8 10

Important Mail Migration
by Webmail Team 26 Sep '15

26 Sep '15

2 1

Change of tmc.openvehicles.com server IP
by Mark Webb-Johnson 21 Sep '15

21 Sep '15

Attn: OVMS user of tmc.openvehicles.com <http://tmc.openvehicles.com/> Short Story The Server IP address for tmc.openvehicles.com <http://tmc.openvehicles.com/> has been changed, and the OVMS module ServerIP setting in your car needs to be changed to match. The new server IP is 54.197.255.127 (the old was 54.243.136.230). If your OVMS module is currently connected to the server, we’ll do this change automatically for you, and there is nothing further you need to do. However, if your car is currently offline, then you may have to manually change this yourself (as we can’t change it remotely for offline cars). Long Story The server IP address for tmc.openvehicles.com <http://tmc.openvehicles.com/> has been changed. For cars currently connected to the server, or connecting within the next 24 hours, we will conduct a migration of parameter #4 automatically, so you don’t need to do anything: #4 SERVERIP 54.243.136.230 -> 54.197.255.127 For those using the tmc.openvehicles.com <http://tmc.openvehicles.com/> server, whose cars are not currently connected, you will need to manually change the parameter #4 (SERVERIP) to the new address 54.197.255.127. You can do that with the ‘SERVER 54.197.255.127’ sms message from your registered phone. Note that in approximately 24-to-48 hours time, the old server IP will be shutdown and no longer available, so we recommend you do this before that time. Regards, Mark Webb-Johnson Open Vehicles

1 0

TMC openvehicles server offline
by Mark Webb-Johnson 19 Sep '15

19 Sep '15

The TMC open vehicles server is offline at the moment. We are working on it. Regards, Mark.

1 1