Add nanostack support for KW41Z #6622

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-12T17:04:05Z

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan [email protected]

Description

Add Thread support for FRDM KW41Z board. This was tested using the mesh-minimal application.

Pull request type

[ ] Fix
[ ] Refactor
[ ] New target
[X] Feature
[ ] Breaking change

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-12T17:06:06Z

cc @maclobdell @karsev @0xc0170

SeppoTakalo · 2018-04-13T09:57:35Z

@mikter @artokin Do you have time to review this?

Also, do we have this board in Oulu for testing?

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-13T12:03:47Z

This PR requires the below fix to be inside mbed-os:
https://github.com/ARMmbed/sal-stack-nanostack-private/pull/1585

0xc0170 · 2018-04-16T12:05:40Z

features/nanostack/FEATURE_NANOSTACK/targets/TARGET_KW41Z/NanostackRfPhyKw41z.cpp

+#define MAC_PACKET_SIZE 127 //MAX MAC payload is 127 bytes
+static uint8_t PHYPAYLOAD[MAC_PACKET_SIZE];
+
+//TODO: verify these values


What does this mean "verify these values"

0xc0170 · 2018-04-16T12:06:05Z

features/nanostack/FEATURE_NANOSTACK/targets/TARGET_KW41Z/NanostackRfPhyKw41z.cpp

+    }
+}
+
+static void rf_mac_set_pending(uint8_t status) {


{ new line

0xc0170 · 2018-04-16T12:07:43Z

features/nanostack/FEATURE_NANOSTACK/targets/TARGET_KW41Z/NanostackRfPhyKw41z.h

+#ifndef NANOSTACK_PHY_KW41Z_H_
+#define NANOSTACK_PHY_KW41Z_H_
+
+#include "mbed.h"


Include what is required here, not mbed.h

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-16T18:06:50Z

@0xc0170 . Thanks for your review. I have updated per your comments. The TODO comment statement in the code was a copy-paste from another driver.

cmonr · 2018-04-17T02:59:29Z

@mmahadevan108 That private PR indicates that the patch isn't in mbed-os yet. Is this still the case, and should we expect a seperate PR for that patch, or has it already made it into mbed-os?

cmonr · 2018-04-17T03:00:31Z

targets/targets.json

@@ -573,7 +573,7 @@
        "supported_form_factors": ["ARDUINO"],
        "core": "Cortex-M0+",
        "supported_toolchains": ["ARM", "GCC_ARM", "IAR"],
-        "extra_labels": ["Freescale", "MCUXpresso_MCUS", "KSDK2_MCUS", "FRDM"],
+        "extra_labels": ["Freescale", "MCUXpresso_MCUS", "KSDK2_MCUS", "FRDM", "FRAMEWORK_5_3_3"],


I take it this is the first device to use this label?
Is this label meant to be some sort of placeholder? I think we coud probably name it something a bit more descriptive.

I also agree. If you cannot find anything related to this by searching Google with FRAMEWORK_5_3_3 then the label is not descriptive enough.

This is related to MCUXpresso SDK radio driver version.

Do we need to have multiple ones in the tree?

Or can it be combined with other flags?

Or can it be made more verbatim like "MCUXPRESSO_FRAMEWORK_5_3_3"

SeppoTakalo · 2018-04-17T07:35:18Z

@mikter is that referenced Nanostack change already published in Mbed OS?
ARMmbed/sal-stack-nanostack-private#1585

SeppoTakalo · 2018-04-17T07:37:55Z

Note:
We are trying to find capacity to test this internally against other driver implementations in our RF lab.

JuhPuur · 2018-04-17T12:45:48Z

We tested the driver with commit 01bb1f94d1f7ed8a67f64bc4f50f723eaafd2335

Energy detection scan has failed to scan channels, with zero energy on most channels. There is no network traffic seen on channels.

Indirect data transmission has failed with error message "Wrongly dropped".
nanostack/source/MAC/IEEE802_15_4/mac_indirect_data.c

We will retest with the updated commit soon.

artokin · 2018-04-17T12:51:01Z

The PR ARMmbed/sal-stack-nanostack-private#1585 is not yet merged to Mbed OS. It will be merged to mbed-os-5.9 release.

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-17T14:12:30Z

@JuhPuur Are you testing against mbed-os repo. This will not work without the fix from
ARMmbed/sal-stack-nanostack-private#1585

JuhPuur · 2018-04-18T09:45:53Z

Re-tested with the fix included. Same issues.

mmahadevan108 · 2018-04-18T11:11:16Z

I would like to run this test to debug, where do I get it.

JuhPuur · 2018-04-18T12:34:40Z

The tests are unfortunately not yet released to partners.
Have not yet verified, but it is possible that indirect transmission fails as the driver is setting pending bit wrong.

0xc0170 · 2019-01-08T14:55:58Z

We will start CI but noticed first Travis failures - we include workaround in travis config . Can you rebase to get it in, travis should be green

mmahadevan108 · 2019-01-08T17:11:03Z

We will start CI but noticed first Travis failures - we include workaround in travis config . Can you rebase to get it in, travis should be green

Rebased and also removed include of mbed.h

0xc0170 · 2019-01-09T08:15:57Z

We fixed Travis failures on master hours ago, and this change should be propagated here via rebase. We will start CI right after travis fix.

I can rebase this later today if not yet done. Sorry for the trouble

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan <[email protected]>

mmahadevan108 · 2019-01-09T13:44:28Z

@0xc0170 I have rebased this PR

0xc0170 · 2019-01-09T13:58:31Z

CI started

mbed-ci · 2019-01-09T21:24:15Z

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 11 test jobs failed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test

mmahadevan108 · 2019-01-10T13:31:54Z

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 11 test jobs failed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test

I am not clear how to address the network test failures seen.

SeppoTakalo · 2019-01-10T15:23:48Z

@mmahadevan108 By default the Greentea tries to run network tests for all boards that provide default network interface, as this does by default.

However, our test environment does not (yet) have properly working Mesh network available. Therefore you need to tell Greentea run that by default, use NO_NETWORK test configuration.

See example here for KW24D platform: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/blob/master/tools/test_configs/target_configs.json#L54..L57

This NO_NETWORK disables the default network interface for Greentea builds, until mbed_app.json is provided. This leads to build of DNS and network interface tests being skipped.

Once you copy&paste the KW24D section for your board, the test run should pass.

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan <[email protected]>

mmahadevan108 · 2019-01-10T15:38:09Z

Thank you. I have updated this PR with the change suggested.

mmahadevan108 · 2019-01-11T13:56:14Z

@0xc0170 Anything needed for this PR from my end?

0xc0170 · 2019-01-11T14:24:53Z

CI started

mbed-ci · 2019-01-11T22:07:30Z

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 11 of 11 test jobs passed
Build number : 2
Build artifacts

mmahadevan108 force-pushed the Add_KW41Z_Thread branch from 8fe0e06 to 01bb1f9 Compare April 12, 2018 17:27

0xc0170 requested review from SeppoTakalo and kseverinkangas-zg April 13, 2018 08:06

0xc0170 added the needs: review label Apr 13, 2018

0xc0170 requested review from mikter and artokin April 13, 2018 10:42

0xc0170 reviewed Apr 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

mmahadevan108 force-pushed the Add_KW41Z_Thread branch from 01bb1f9 to a980e9a Compare April 16, 2018 17:57

cmonr added the needs: preceding PR label Apr 17, 2018

cmonr reviewed Apr 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

cmonr added the release-version: 5.9.0-rc1 label Apr 17, 2018

adbridge added needs: work needs: preceding PR and removed needs: preceding PR needs: review labels Apr 30, 2018

0xc0170 removed the needs: work label Jan 8, 2019

mmahadevan108 force-pushed the Add_KW41Z_Thread branch from 5456589 to 4634a64 Compare January 8, 2019 17:10

kseverinkangas-zg approved these changes Jan 9, 2019

View reviewed changes

0xc0170 mentioned this pull request Jan 9, 2019

export -i make_gcc_arm build fails ARMmbed/mbed-cli#816

Closed

mmahadevan108 added 2 commits January 9, 2019 07:43

Add nanostack support for KW41Z

585a4b6

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan <[email protected]>

Update TEST_APPS to add KW41Z for nanostack tests

40864d4

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan <[email protected]>

mmahadevan108 force-pushed the Add_KW41Z_Thread branch from 4634a64 to 40864d4 Compare January 9, 2019 13:44

cmonr removed the needs: CI label Jan 10, 2019

Supply test config for KW41Z

7981fdf

Signed-off-by: Mahesh Mahadevan <[email protected]>

0xc0170 added the needs: CI label Jan 11, 2019

NirSonnenschein added ready for merge and removed needs: CI labels Jan 13, 2019

0xc0170 added release-version: 5.11.2 release-version: 5.11.3 and removed release-version: 5.11.2 labels Jan 14, 2019

0xc0170 merged commit 5212cc6 into ARMmbed:master Jan 14, 2019

0xc0170 removed the ready for merge label Jan 14, 2019

mmahadevan108 deleted the Add_KW41Z_Thread branch January 17, 2019 17:26

Add nanostack support for KW41Z #6622

Add nanostack support for KW41Z #6622

Uh oh!

Conversation

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 12, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Pull request type

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 12, 2018

Uh oh!

SeppoTakalo commented Apr 13, 2018

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 13, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 16, 2018

Uh oh!

cmonr commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SeppoTakalo commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

SeppoTakalo commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

JuhPuur commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

artokin commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

JuhPuur commented Apr 18, 2018

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 18, 2018

Uh oh!

JuhPuur commented Apr 18, 2018

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Jan 8, 2019

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Jan 8, 2019

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Jan 9, 2019

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Jan 9, 2019

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Jan 9, 2019

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Jan 9, 2019

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Jan 10, 2019

Uh oh!

SeppoTakalo commented Jan 10, 2019

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Jan 10, 2019

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Jan 11, 2019

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Jan 11, 2019

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Jan 11, 2019

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mmahadevan108 commented Apr 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading