• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 51 subscribers
  • Views 460 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

LAUNCHXL-CC1352R1: BLE Notification failed when sending using periodic events

James Mel
Expert 1380 points
Part Number: LAUNCHXL-CC1352R1


Greetings,

In the "dmm_wsnnode_remote_display_cc1352r1lp_app" example, I was using periodic events as in user guide (here).


I created an event to send a BLE message (write a characteristic with notification enabled) every 5 seconds, but it didn't work as the Bluetooth disconnects! I found that in the first event occurrence, the system aborts while trying to send the BLE notification (after the characteristic data is written).

In GATT_Notification [ that is icall_directAPI ] function, the function ICall_getEntityId() returns ICALL_INVALID_ENTITY_ID !

So, the function ICall_waitMatch() returns ICALL_ERRNO_UNKNOWN_THREAD and the function ICall_abort() is called.

What causes this issue? The BLE notification works fine when we read one characteristic and write in another. Why does the ICall module returns such an error?

* James *

  • 0
    TI__Genius 11535 points
    Hi James,

    I recommend looking at the way we implement periodic events in our simple peripheral example and comparing it to your code. How do you create your event and handle it in your code? Also, since you are using DMM you will need to be careful and make sure nothing with BLE has been disabled before trying to send the notification.
  • 0 in reply to Jessica H.
    TI__Genius 11535 points
    Hi James,

    I'm going to close this post due to inactivity. To reopen this thread, just post a follow up question. Otherwise, after 30-days of inactivity from this post, this thread will lock. If you reject that this post has been potentially resolved, please indicate why you are rejecting it so we may better assist you.