July 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

Warning in Duktape
by Michael Geddes 09 Aug '24

09 Aug '24

There's an unused variable 'dcc' warning in the below code. It seems that the 'Perform the callback' is not being 'performed! Is this deliberate? //.ichael void DukOvmsCommandRegisterRun(int verbosity, OvmsWriter* writer, OvmsCommand* cmd, int argc, const char* const* argv) { ESP_LOGD(TAG, "DukOvmsCommandRegisterRun(%s)",cmd->GetName()); auto it = MyDuktape.m_cmdmap.find(cmd); if (it == MyDuktape.m_cmdmap.end()) { ESP_LOGE(TAG, "Command '%s' cannot be found in registry",cmd->GetName ()); return; } else { DuktapeConsoleCommand* dcc = it->second; // Perform the callback } }

3 6

SDCard speed / max speed
by Michael Geddes 30 Jul '24

30 Jul '24

I was looking at adding the maximum host speed as well as the sdcard speed to the SD Card information. My question is whether the 'max speed' is apples-for-apples comparable with the card frequency or whether they are not quite the same thing? //. if (verbosity > COMMAND_RESULT_MINIMAL) { writer->printf("\nCard type: %s\n", (card->ocr & SD_OCR_SDHC_CAP)?"SDHC/SDXC":"SDSC"); - writer->printf("Max speed: %d kHz\n", card->csd.tr_speed/1000); + int maxspeed = card->csd.tr_speed/1000; + writer->printf("Max speed: %d kHz\n", maxspeed); + int maxfreq = MyPeripherals->m_sdcard->m_host.max_freq_khz; + if (maxspeed > maxfreq) + writer->printf("Max host speed: %d kHz\n", maxfreq); writer->printf("Capacity: %llu MB\n", ((uint64_t) card->csd.capacity) * card->csd.sector_size / (1024 * 1024)); writer->printf("CSD: ver=%d, sector_size=%d, capacity=%d read_bl_len=%d\n", card->csd.csd_ver,

2 1

Ovms Poller and Leaf, where are we at?
by Michael Geddes 28 Jul '24

28 Jul '24

I really want to make sure that we get this Leaf issue sorted out. Has there been any progress? Did my latest changes sort the issue out? //.ichael

1 0

Uart errors accessing SD Card
by Michael Geddes 22 Jul '24

22 Jul '24

Since forever I've been getting uart errors (4) - which seems to be an ERROR *E (56071827) uart_events: uart event type: 4* It seems it gets easily overwhelmed. For example while doing (From the web i/f) 'vfs ls /sd' is fine (there are only 15 entries there) .. the command: *vfs ls /sd/log* causes a whole bunch of the above uart errors (l50 or so) interrupted by the output of the command results (50 or so files). I'm not sure whether it lists all of them.. but probably? I was implementing file completion in 'vfs' command.. and it works except for when trying to complete in that directory. I suspect that it's overwhelming the limited spaces in the complete buffer.. but also the messages queue is getting swamped by all the uart_event errors. Thoughts? //.ichael

3 4

Google requiring API level 14+ for play apps
by Mark Webb-Johnson 17 Jul '24

17 Jul '24

Issue details Summary Status You won't be able to release app updates (45 days away) Date sent Jul 4, 2024 Deadline Aug 31, 2024 Violation App must target Android 14 (API level 34) or higher Details To provide users with a safe and secure experience, Google Play requires all apps to meet target API level requirements. From Aug 31, 2024, if your target API level is not within 1 year of the latest Android release, you won't be able to update your app. How to fix Your highest non-compliant target API level is Android 13 (API level 33). To ensure that you can continue to make updates to your app you must: Update your app to target Android 14 (API level 34) or higher. Publish a new version of your app to production. Before you do this, you can test your app using internal, closed, or open testing. Once you've done this, we'll send you an Inbox message to confirm that your app update was successful, and that your app is no longer affected. For more information: Learn more about the requirements <https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/11926878> Learn how to update your app <https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9859350> Learn what changes you may need to make in your app <https://developer.android.com/google/play/requirements/target-sdk> Read the policy announcement <https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/13411745>

1 0

Adding Pollers object to Duktape
by Michael Geddes 08 Jul '24

08 Jul '24

I figured I may as well add an OvmsPoller object to DukTape for Ovms. I'm waiting to get back to my OVMS so that I can test it.. but this is the documentation I have for the stuff I have coded. Thoughts on this? What do people think of OvmsPoller.Times sub-object? I've added a general mechanism for this. Also should I have OvmsPoller.Pause() or OvmsPoller.SetUserPaused(true) ? //. OvmsPoller ^^^^^^^^^^ The Ovms Poller object represents the poller sub-system. It contains the following methods: - ``ispaused = OvmsPoller.GetPaused()``: Return true if the poller is paused by the system/user. - ``ispaused = OvmsPoller.GetUserPaused()``: Return true if the poller is paused by the user. - ``OvmsPoller.Pause()``: Pause the poller (adds User poller pause) - ``OvmsPoller.Resume()``: Remove the User poller pause. - ``tracemode = OvmsPoller.GetTrace()``: Return the current trace mode. - ``OvmsPoller.SetTrace(tracemode)``: Set the current trace mode. The Traces still require that 'Verbose' and 'Debug' levels (depending) for the 'vehicle-poll' debug tag are set. Trace modes for verbose logging can be one of: - ``on``: On for poller loop - ``txrx``: On for txrx queue (this can be hazardous for some cars) - ``all``: On for both poller loop and txrx queuing - ``off``: Logging Off Note that only ``on`` and ``off`` are recommended. The poller object also contains a ``Times`` property for the OBD Poll-Time tracing which contains the following methods: - ``isrunning = OvmsPoller.Times.GetEnabled()``: Returns true if the time-tracing is enabled - ``OvmsPoller.Times.SetEnabled(isrunning)``: Sets the enabled status of the timer-tracing - ``OvmsPoller.Times.Reset()``: Reset the timers (doesn't affect their current state). - ``OvmsPoller.Times.GetStatus()``: Gets the status of the various times. This returns an object of this format: .. code-block:: javascript return_value = { "items": { "Poll:PRI" : { "count_hz": 1, "avg_util_pm": 0.529, "peak_util_pm":0.652, "avg_time_ms": 0.052, "peak_time_ms":1.516 }, "Poll:SRX": { "count_hz": 1.47, "avg_util_pm": 0.302, "peak_util_pm":0.44, "avg_time_ms": 0.02, "peak_time_ms":0.573 }, "RxCan1[778]": { "count_hz": 0.74, "avg_util_pm": 0.427, "peak_util_pm":0.826, "avg_time_ms": 0.063, "peak_time_ms":1.872 }, "RxCan1[7a8]": { "count_hz": 0.35, "avg_util_pm": 0.183, "peak_util_pm":0.355, "avg_time_ms": 0.052, "peak_time_ms":1.382 }, "TxCan1[7b3]": { "count_hz": 0.07, "avg_util_pm": 0.005, "peak_util_pm":0.01, "avg_time_ms": 0.007, "peak_time_ms":0.099 }, "TxCan1[7c6]": { "count_hz": 0, "avg_util_pm": 0, "peak_util_pm":0.009, "avg_time_ms": 0.004, "peak_time_ms":0.098 }, "Cmd:State": { "count_hz": 0, "avg_util_pm": 0, "peak_util_pm":0, "avg_time_ms": 0.011, "peak_time_ms":0.109 } }, "tot_count_hz": 11.76, "tot_util_pm": 6.247, "tot_time_ms": 4.628 };

2 7