October 2024 - OvmsDev - Open Vehicles

Re: [Ovmsdev] OVMS Poller module/singleton
by Michael Balzer 08 Feb '25

08 Feb '25

Michael, (taking this back to the list, as other developers may have helpful ideas or suggestions) from a first check, your new patch (PR #1008) won't help for vehicles that don't use the poller, like the generic DBC vehicle or the Fiat 500 (plus possibly non-public third party vehicles). As the poller is normally compiled in, these would need a run time switch to re-enable the vehicle task, or more suitably default into that configuration and switch to the poller task only when the poller gets initialized. How about moving the task back into the vehicle class, but keeping your task message extensions while doing so, and adding a way for the poller to hook into the task? The dedicated vehicle task is an essential part of the vehicle framework, but I do remember some occasions where a general way to pass custom messages to the vehicle task would have been helpful to use the task for more than CAN processing. If the poller shall become avaible as a separate service that can be used without any vehicle instance (currently not a defined use case), the construct of a CAN processor task that can be extended for custom messages (or a message processor task that can subscribe to CAN frames) could be factored out into a dedicated class or template. The poller could then create his own instance of that class, if it cannot hook into an existing one. Btw, in case you're not aware of this, FreeRTOS also provides queue sets (https://www.freertos.org/RTOS-queue-sets.html) We haven't used them in the OVMS yet, but they could be useful, especially if message unions become large or tasks shall be able to dynamically subscribe to different message sources. Regards, Michael Am 30.04.24 um 01:20 schrieb Michael Geddes: > It might be worth reverting, but, I've got a patch suggestion that > I'll push up which will let me know if I understand everything and > which might provide a solution. > > If this isn't going to work then revert. (P/R coming) > > While the poller was still a part of the vehicle class it was probably > still all ok. The poller had taken over what I assume you are > talking about as the vehicle task. A call-back fromthe poller was > calling IncomingPollRxFrame which was then coming from the (now) > poller task (is that correct?) > > While we have OVMS_COMP_POLLER config defined, we could just use the > poller task to provide the IncomingPollRxFrame call-back from the > poller (was vehicle?) task. > > The problem is when OVMS_COMP_POLLER is undefined, we need an > alternate (maybe we could use the 'Event' loop then) which is when I > hacked that bad solution. > > > //.ichael > > > I was thinking though that because everything is being queued we could > divert some calls into the car > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, 18:58 Michael Balzer, <dexter(a)expeedo.de> wrote: > > Michael, > > I've found a severe design flaw with your poller change. Sorry, I > should have seen that before, and shouldn't have merged this. > > You have moved the standard CAN frame processing from the vehicle > task into the CAN task by changing the vehicle from a CAN listener > to a CAN callback processor. That will break all kind of things, > vehicles like the Twizy, Smart and many others rely on frame > processing being done in the dedicated vehicle task. > > This especially induces issues regarding CAN processing capacity, > as the vehicles rely on having a separate context and not needing > to decouple complex processing of incoming frames. So this will > degrade the CAN processing performance seriously in many cases, > where additional steps involving file or network I/O need to be done. > > So this needs to be changed back. > > I assumed you introduced a new dedicated poller task but kept the > vehicle task intact. From your naming > (OvmsVehicle::IncomingPollRxFrame), it seems you misinterpreted > the vehicle task's purpose as only being used for polling. > > I assume this isn't a small change…? If so we should revert the > poller merge, to avoid having a defunctional edge build state > until the fix. > > > Secondly: logging is generally expensive regardless of the log > level control and log channels enabled. Any log message needs to > be queued to the log system, so involves a lock and a potential > wait state (for the queue) & resulting context switch (= minimum > delay of 10 ms). Therefore, logging must be avoided as far as > possible in any time critical context, and is forbidden under some > circumstances, e.g. in a timer callback (see FreeRTOS docs on > this). The log system load multiplies with connected web clients > or enabled file logging and enabled debug / verbose level logging > -- that quickly becomes too much, usually triggering the task > watchdog. > > Your logging of nearly all bus events passing to/from the poller > (especially the log entry in Queue_PollerFrame) becomes an issue > on any vehicle that has high frequency running process data frames > on the bus, like the Twizy or Smart. As a counter measure, I've > just added a runtime control for all the poller's verbose logging > (by default now off), and changed some debug level logs to > verbose. Not sure if I've catched all that may need to be silenced > by default. Please check all your log calls and place them under > the new "trace" control flag wherever appropriate. > > This won't help avoiding issues with process data frame buses though. > > > Shall I revert the poller merge for now? > > Regards, > Michael > > > > Am 29.04.24 um 06:18 schrieb Michael Geddes: >> Btw I included the log changes in the p/r which is a few small >> commits for the poller. >> >> //. >> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, 07:20 Michael Geddes, >> <frog(a)bunyip.wheelycreek.net> wrote: >> >> Hey Michael, >> I've got to work now (it's Monday), but I suspect those >> 'giving up' are from unsolicited messages on the bus. >> I can re-order things so that the message will likely be >> 'dropped (no poll entry)' rather than the time-out message. >> And make it a verbose log. >> >> //.ichael >> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 00:25, Michael Balzer >> <dexter(a)expeedo.de> wrote: >> >> Michael, >> >> forwarding the Twizy logs to you directly, as they >> contain the user location. >> >> He has just verified it's the new version, he says the >> module stops responding as soon as he turns on the Twizy. >> >> His description of his actions is a bit ambiguous, and it >> seems he didn't enable logging to the file persistently. >> >> According to the server, these were the version boot times: >> >> 2024-04-28 15:30:56 0 3.3.004-32-g125e0841/ota_0/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 26 2024 19:16:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:21:08 0 3.3.004-32-g125e0841/ota_0/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 26 2024 19:16:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:38:33 0 3.3.004-63-gf3595561/ota_1/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 27 2024 07:44:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:40:57 0 3.3.004-63-gf3595561/ota_1/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 27 2024 07:44:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:43:14 0 3.3.004-63-gf3595561/ota_1/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 27 2024 07:44:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:46:39 0 3.3.004-63-gf3595561/ota_1/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 27 2024 07:44:50) >> 2024-04-28 16:54:44 0 3.3.004-32-g125e0841/ota_0/edge >> (build idf v3.3.4-849-g6e214dc335 Apr 26 2024 19:16:50) >> >> Attached is also his crash debug log -- a2ll doesn't tell >> much about what happened, but maybe you get an idea from >> this. >> >> After the boot at 16:46, there are immediately lots of >> these messages: >> >> 2024-04-28 16:46:33.792 CEST D (39042) vehicle-poll: >> Poller: Queue PollerFrame() >> 2024-04-28 16:46:33.792 CEST D (39042) vehicle-poll: >> [1]Poller: Incoming - giving up >> >> Regards, >> Michael >> >> >> Am 28.04.24 um 16:44 schrieb Michael Geddes: >>> Ah. OK. >>> >>> I could try to fix the vin thing using the new way of >>> doing it and get rid of a semaphore? >>> It would at least identify the problem possibly? >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, 22:32 Michael Balzer via OvmsDev, >>> <ovmsdev(a)lists.openvehicles.com> wrote: >>> >>> Not sure if that's the problem, but I've found a >>> different behaviour with the new PollSetState() >>> implementation. >>> >>> The old version only did anything if the new state >>> actually was different from the previous one. The >>> Twizy relies on this behaviour, calling >>> PollSetState() from the per second ticker (see >>> OvmsVehicleRenaultTwizy::ObdTicker1). >>> >>> The new implementation apparently always sends the >>> PollState command to the task, and that in turn >>> always at least locks the poller mutex. Not sure >>> if/how that could cause the observed issues, but it >>> definitely adds quite some (unnecessary?) >>> lock/unlock operations. >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 28.04.24 um 16:05 schrieb Michael Balzer via OvmsDev: >>>> The Twizy uses the poller to query the VIN (once) >>>> and DTCs (every 10 seconds while driving), see >>>> rt_obd2.cpp. >>>> >>>> It also has its own version of the OBD single >>>> request (OvmsVehicleRenaultTwizy::ObdRequest), >>>> which was the precursor for the generalized >>>> version. This is used by custom/user Twizy plugins >>>> and scripts to access ECU internals. >>>> >>>> The Twizy doesn't use IncomingPollRxFrame, but the >>>> Twizy's IncomingPollReply handler will log any poll >>>> responses it doesn't know about, so that could lead >>>> to a lot of log output if something goes wrong there. >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 28.04.24 um 15:49 schrieb Michael Geddes via >>>> OvmsDev: >>>>> AFAICT the twizzy doesn't use the poller list at >>>>> all. So is it missing a call-back or something?? >>>>> >>>>> I can see a potential problem with >>>>> IncomingPollRxFrame being called twice as much as >>>>> it should be but only when there is a poll list. >>>>> Maybe commenting out this would do it. (I can >>>>> find another away to get this called on the thread >>>>> I want). This might be the problem with the smarted >>>>> >>>>> void >>>>> OvmsVehicle::OvmsVehicleSignal::IncomingPollRxFrame(canbus* >>>>> bus, CAN_frame_t *frame, bool success) >>>>> { >>>>> //if (Ready()) >>>>> // m_parent->IncomingPollRxFrame(frame, success); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> //. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 at 21:10, Michael Balzer via >>>>> OvmsDev <ovmsdev(a)lists.openvehicles.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There may also be an issue with the Renault >>>>> Twizy, I've received a report of a user who is >>>>> using the edge builds, that the latest build >>>>> wouldn't work. >>>>> >>>>> He reports all kinds of errors and warnings >>>>> signaled by the car during driving, and >>>>> switching back to the previous build fixed the >>>>> issues. >>>>> >>>>> I've asked him to provide a debug log excerpt >>>>> if possible. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 28.04.24 um 14:29 schrieb Michael Geddes >>>>> via OvmsDev: >>>>>> OK. That's bad. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does the reading work in general? >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it just the writing commands? >>>>>> >>>>>> Raise a ticket on github and tag me in and we >>>>>> can address it that way. >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, 19:49 Thomas Heuer via >>>>>> OvmsDev, <ovmsdev(a)lists.openvehicles.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> The new poller code doesn't seem to work >>>>>> properly with the smarted. >>>>>> >>>>>> D (218831) vehicle-poll: >>>>>> [1]PollerNextTick(PRI): cycle complete >>>>>> for ticker=215 >>>>>> >>>>>> V (218831) vehicle-poll: Standard Poll >>>>>> Series: List reset >>>>>> >>>>>> D (218831) vehicle-poll: >>>>>> PollSeriesList::NextPollEntry[!v.standard]: >>>>>> ReachedEnd >>>>>> >>>>>> V (218831) vehicle-poll: [1]PollerSend: >>>>>> Poller Reached End >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219691) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219691) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219691) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219691) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219691) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219691) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219691) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> *OVMS#*unlock 22 >>>>>> Vehicle unlocked >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219691) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219691) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219691) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> V (219701) vehicle-poll: Pollers: >>>>>> FrameRx(bus=2) >>>>>> >>>>>> D (219701) vehicle-poll: Poller: Queue >>>>>> PollerFrame() >>>>>> >>>>>> *Von:*OvmsDev >>>>>> <ovmsdev-bounces(a)lists.openvehicles.com> >>>>>> *Im Auftrag von *Michael Geddes via OvmsDev >>>>>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 28. April 2024 12:27 >>>>>> *An:* OVMS Developers >>>>>> <ovmsdev(a)lists.openvehicles.com> >>>>>> *Cc:* Michael Geddes >>>>>> <frog(a)bunyip.wheelycreek.net> >>>>>> *Betreff:* [Ovmsdev] OVMS Poller >>>>>> module/singleton >>>>>> >>>>>> Hey all, >>>>>> >>>>>> The poller singleton code that I've been >>>>>> working on for over a year now is merged >>>>>> in. (Thanks Michael for expediting the >>>>>> final step). >>>>>> >>>>>> This includes separate multi-frame states >>>>>> per bus and multiple poll lists as well >>>>>> as non-blocking one off queries. As well >>>>>> as more 'states'. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have included some programming >>>>>> documentation in the change but am happy >>>>>> to supply more if needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> The ioniq 5 code has some examples of how >>>>>> it can be used. Some examples are: >>>>>> >>>>>> * grabbing the vin as a one shot without >>>>>> blocking >>>>>> >>>>>> * having a short list of queries that are >>>>>> polled quickly for obd2ecu (this also >>>>>> demonstrates using a shorter frame break >>>>>> value and then a break after successful a >>>>>> response) >>>>>> >>>>>> Have a play please! >>>>>> >>>>>> Also interested in hearing what user >>>>>> tools might be worth looking at next for >>>>>> the poller object. >>>>>> >>>>>> //.ichael G. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list >>>>>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> OvmsDev mailing list >>>>>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal >>>>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26 >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> OvmsDev mailing list >>>>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> OvmsDev mailing list >>>>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal >>>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OvmsDev mailing list >>>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal >>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OvmsDev mailing list >>> OvmsDev(a)lists.openvehicles.com >>> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev >>> >> >> -- >> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal >> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26 >> > > -- > Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal > Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26 > -- Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26

7 117

Can bus error while read canbus
by didier＠ernotte.com 03 Nov '24

03 Nov '24

Hi, I don't know what changed on my OVMS box, but I am no longer abl to read manually (in the shell) any PID with the "obdii can1 request...". I receive the tranmission failure error. But it used to work fine a couple of days ago. Other commands works great like "re obdii scan start...", so the connection with the OMVS box, communication on the OBD2 port, etc works fine. What could go wrong ? I tried to download the lasted image. Same error. Here is a session that I did : OVMS# re obdii scan start 1 7e4 dd00 de00 -r7ec Scan started: bus 1, ecu 7e4, rxid 7ec-7ec, polltype 22, PID dd00-de00 (step 1), timeout 3 seconds I (804831) webcommand: HttpCommandStream[0x3f8d76b0]: 3317288 bytes free, executing: re obdii scan start 1 7e4 dd00 de00 -r7ecI (810981) re-pid: Scan of 7e4 completeI (817271) webserver: HTTP POST /api/executeOVMS# re obdii scan status Scan complete (7e4 dd00-de00)Scan started : 2024-10-30 17:46:53 EDTLast response: 2024-10-30 17:46:53 EDT7e4[7ec]:dd00 70 e8 79 bb7e4[7ec]:dd01 01 1c f87e4[7ec]:dd02 3a7e4[7ec]:dd04 3d7e4[7ec]:dd05 3a7e4[7ec]:dd06 e77e4[7ec]:dd08 007e4[7ec]:dd09 00I (817271) webcommand: HttpCommandStream[0x3f8d7350]: 3314968 bytes free, executing: re obdii scan statusI (821941) webserver: HTTP POST /api/executeI (821941) webcommand: HttpCommandStream[0x3f8d7414]: 3318624 bytes free, executing: obdii can1 request device 7E4 7EC 22dd00OVMS# obdii can1 request device 7E4 7EC 22dd00 7e4[7ec] 22dd00: ERROR: transmission failure (CAN bus error)Didier

3 10

A forum developer question
by Mark Webb-Johnson 07 Oct '24

07 Oct '24

A question regarding web dashboard plugin development has been asked on the forums. Grateful if someone could assist. https://www.openvehicles.com/node/4281 Hi everybody, Although I am not completely new to JavaScript programming, I am new to the concept of OVMS plugins and read the documentation regarding it several times.. I also got the fog light example up and running on my unit. But I guess I am missing something obviously important (that is not 100% explained in the documentation?) while trying to build a very simple plugin on my own: I don't want any events or updates, but simply extend the dashboard by some additional metrics read just once when initializing the dashboard. This is what I have created:... Regards, Mark.

1 0

Duktape Vehicle
by Michael Geddes 06 Oct '24

06 Oct '24

In a recent conversation with Mark we were talking about utilising Duktape more for perhaps even vehicle implementations. I'm wondering if a better approach is to allow any vehicle to be extended via hooks in the base vehicle class or would it be better to have a duktape vehicle that could be extended. There would necessarily be many bits to the puzzle. For example I have a class that allows us to know when blips to the 12V battery line might mean that somebody is interacting with the car so we should start polling the bus.. Should we put this (with a duktape interface) at the vehicle.h level? //.ichael

2 2