-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 856
BT lockless queue #867
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
1technophile
merged 7 commits into
1technophile:development
from
csiki2:BT_lockless_queue
Feb 26, 2021
Merged
BT lockless queue #867
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
08e6cf0
Lockless json queue for ESP32 BT to avoid SYStoMQTT concurrency issue
csiki2 9cf9fb7
getBTJsonObject missing () fix for non-ESP32
csiki2 c604bc9
Lint fixes (1.0)
csiki2 6443a83
Lint (1.1)
csiki2 ce6fd0f
BT haRoomPresence handle with lockless queue
csiki2 53eaedc
Resolving the multiple servicedata case
csiki2 c02424e
Lint fix
csiki2 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is this
ifnot redundant with the condition added into thewhileloop and of theelse if?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If there was a connection phase before that we may already waited seconds and the validity of ProcessLock long gone.
Also, we don't want to take too much time in anything that has delay() in it.
I even added a delay(Scan_duration < 2000 ? Scan_duration : 2000); to the stopprocessing: this gives more time to leave the BT loop gracefully. Unfortunately waiting to much will result in a timeout at platformio.
I needed these as I am more aggressive in the BT parameterwise and I am able to kill the OTA easily (ofc with the lockless queue)...