|
[TCP/MQTT] Connection issue
Hello Guillaume, There could certainly be a bug in the socket offloading layer for UBLOX Sara R4 (I'm the maintainer for the current modem layer in Zephyr): https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephy
Hello Guillaume, There could certainly be a bug in the socket offloading layer for UBLOX Sara R4 (I'm the maintainer for the current modem layer in Zephyr): https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephy
|
By
Michael Scott
· #6580
·
|
|
LWM2M batch uploading data
Hello Benjamin, You are correct. The missing piece is LwM2M queue mode support. This mode is registered during the initial client / server connection. It means there is a mutual agreement that the cli
Hello Benjamin, You are correct. The missing piece is LwM2M queue mode support. This mode is registered during the initial client / server connection. It means there is a mutual agreement that the cli
|
By
Michael Scott
· #6319
·
|
|
4G/5G modem supported by Zephyr or not?
Hello Shlomi, If the modem had a physical interface which supported the PPP protocol you could in theory create a new: modem_iface_ppp.c file which managed it (as opposed to using the current UART-bas
Hello Shlomi, If the modem had a physical interface which supported the PPP protocol you could in theory create a new: modem_iface_ppp.c file which managed it (as opposed to using the current UART-bas
|
By
Michael Scott
· #6312
·
|
|
4G/5G modem supported by Zephyr or not?
Hello Liang, I gave a presentation at Embedded Linux Conference about this exact subject. Slides: https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/ossna19/61/AT-based%20Modem%20Support%20in%20the%20Zephyr%20Proj
Hello Liang, I gave a presentation at Embedded Linux Conference about this exact subject. Slides: https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/ossna19/61/AT-based%20Modem%20Support%20in%20the%20Zephyr%20Proj
|
By
Michael Scott
· #6305
·
|
|
Using BLE IPSP with a Smartphone or Tablet as Host
Hi Häring,One issue that I can think of: several bluetooth/6lowpan crash bugs were submitted for the 4.12 kernel. For testing you could backport them, but to gain generic support across mass devices t
Hi Häring,One issue that I can think of: several bluetooth/6lowpan crash bugs were submitted for the 4.12 kernel. For testing you could backport them, but to gain generic support across mass devices t
|
By
Michael Scott
· #5336
·
|
|
6LoWPAN and Zephyr
Hello Joakim, Looks like the nRF52840-DK board is supported for the RPL-node sample. - Mike
Hello Joakim, Looks like the nRF52840-DK board is supported for the RPL-node sample. - Mike
|
By
Michael Scott
· #5082
·
|
|
Zephyr IPv6 default router / prefix networking options
Hello Devs, I'd like to discuss some different approaches to a simple setup for BLE and iwpan 802.15.4 nodes connected to a gateway via 6lowpan (in a star pattern). No mesh involved. On the gateway si
Hello Devs, I'd like to discuss some different approaches to a simple setup for BLE and iwpan 802.15.4 nodes connected to a gateway via 6lowpan (in a star pattern). No mesh involved. On the gateway si
|
By
Michael Scott
· #4955
·
|
|
Zephyr development news, 10 July 2018
Hello, This is the 10 July 2018 newsletter tracking the latest Zephyr development merged into the mainline tree on GitHub. An HTML version is here: https://foundries.io/blog/2018/07/10/zephyr-news-201
Hello, This is the 10 July 2018 newsletter tracking the latest Zephyr development merged into the mainline tree on GitHub. An HTML version is here: https://foundries.io/blog/2018/07/10/zephyr-news-201
|
By
Michael Scott
· #4855
·
|
|
Cellular Modem support
Hello Ryan (and Paul), I updated the WCN-M14A2A LTE-M modem driver PR today: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/6344 There are quite a few "things-to-do", but it's nice as a reference f
Hello Ryan (and Paul), I updated the WCN-M14A2A LTE-M modem driver PR today: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/6344 There are quite a few "things-to-do", but it's nice as a reference f
|
By
Michael Scott
· #4705
·
|
|
NRF52840 UART1
Hi Jakub, Is there any downside to depreciating the use of UART shim for nRF52 and using UARTE for all interfaces? (I think nRF51 would still require UART shim) I was under the impression that power c
Hi Jakub, Is there any downside to depreciating the use of UART shim for nRF52 and using UARTE for all interfaces? (I think nRF51 would still require UART shim) I was under the impression that power c
|
By
Michael Scott
· #4608
·
|
|
Some flash drivers don't use DTS write-block-size setting (even though it's set)
Hello Zephyr-devel list, I noticed today that many of the flash drivers don't make use of the DTS "write-block-size" setting (STM being the exception): $ fgrep -nr "write_block_size" drivers/flash dri
Hello Zephyr-devel list, I noticed today that many of the flash drivers don't make use of the DTS "write-block-size" setting (STM being the exception): $ fgrep -nr "write_block_size" drivers/flash dri
|
By
Michael Scott
· #2014
·
|
|
Firmware over the air (FOTA) and FCB support in 1.11.0
IIRC, the idea is to settle on 1 solution which would be appropriate for most use-cases (including Mesh Sequence Numbers). You might want to have 2 separate storage locations if you have data that onl
IIRC, the idea is to settle on 1 solution which would be appropriate for most use-cases (including Mesh Sequence Numbers). You might want to have 2 separate storage locations if you have data that onl
|
By
Michael Scott
· #1950
·
|
|
Firmware over the air (FOTA) and FCB support in 1.11.0
Hi Ashish, Your question is a bit open-ended, and might be difficult to answer without some details regarding your paricular use-case (BLE update, IP-based update, Mesh, etc) For instance, the LwM2M s
Hi Ashish, Your question is a bit open-ended, and might be difficult to answer without some details regarding your paricular use-case (BLE update, IP-based update, Mesh, etc) For instance, the LwM2M s
|
By
Michael Scott
· #1945
·
|
|
New HTTP Library Issue
Per: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230 "A sender MUST NOT send a Content-Length header field in any message that contains a Transfer-Encoding header field." -- Mike
Per: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230 "A sender MUST NOT send a Content-Length header field in any message that contains a Transfer-Encoding header field." -- Mike
|
By
Michael Scott
· #1232
·
|
|
New HTTP Library Issue
Hello Jukka / Paul, We are using the legacy HTTP API's current and include a "Content-Length:" header field to denote the amount of data in the payload. The new API is completely broken when including
Hello Jukka / Paul, We are using the legacy HTTP API's current and include a "Content-Length:" header field to denote the amount of data in the payload. The new API is completely broken when including
|
By
Michael Scott
· #1230
·
|