CCS/CC1352R: Adding BLE stack/support to existing project

Hi Tim,
If I understand your use case correctly, i'd suggest you look into using the DMM. There are some useful OOB examples in the latest SDK;
dev.ti.com/.../

Otherwise, it's generally better to use a BLE based project and add whatever you need on top of that.

Joakim -

Thank you for the response. I do not think I need the overhead of DMM as we will only be using BLE to provision the device in a special mode immediately following power-on and then can "switch it off" and run the "normal" activities with the sub-1GHz radio after that.

It sounds like I should start with a BLE example and modify it to what I need, then add the sub-1GHz support I need to that project. If so, any suggestions on disabling one radio and enabling the other while running?

Thanks again!
.Tim

Chris -

Thank you for the response. I looked more closely at the DMM information and have the WSNNode/SimplePeripheral example running on my board.

I did not search hard for more details, but I modified things as seemed logical to disable BLE when I was done with it.

In dmm_policy_blesp_wsnnode.h, added new state to bit map:

#define DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_DONE         0x00000008 //!< State for BLE when access is complete

In dmm_policy_blesp_wsnnode_ble_high.c, added new state to table:

//State 4: BleSp complete: BleSp  = Low Priority | Time None Critical, WsnNode = High Priority | Time Critical
    {
      {DMMPolicy_StackRole_BlePeripheral, DMMPolicy_StackRole_WsnNode},
      {(DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_DONE) , (DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_WSNNODE_ANY)},
      {DMMPOLICY_PRIORITY_LOW, DMMPOLICY_TIME_NONE_CRITICAL, DMMPOLICY_PAUSED, //BLE SP Stack
       DMMPOLICY_PRIORITY_HIGH, DMMPOLICY_TIME_CRITICAL, DMMPOLICY_NOT_PAUSED} //WSN NODE Stack
    },

And in simple_peripheral.c::SimplePeripheral_bleFastStateUpdateCb(), instead of entering _ADV state, modified to enter new _DONE state:

    else if( (prevStackState & LL_TASK_ID_SLAVE) && !(stackState & LL_TASK_ID_SLAVE))
    {
      //We just disconnected
#ifdef RF_PROFILING
        PIN_setOutputValue(rfBleProfilingPinHandle, BLE_CONNECTED_GPIO, 0);
#endif

        /* update DMM policy */
//        DMMPolicy_updateStackState(DMMPolicy_StackRole_BlePeripheral, DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_ADV);
        DMMPolicy_updateStackState(DMMPolicy_StackRole_BlePeripheral, DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_DONE);
    }

I am unsure if this code is running as I am unable to set a breakpoint there- CCS tells me there is "No code associated" with that line. There is no change in behavior when running the code- I am still able to connect with BTool after disconnecting.

I am pretty sure the DMMPOLICY_PAUSED is doing something as I next modified main.c::main() to initialize the BLE state to _DONE:

  /*set the stacks in default states */
//  DMMPolicy_updateStackState(DMMPolicy_StackRole_BlePeripheral, DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_ADV);
  DMMPolicy_updateStackState(DMMPolicy_StackRole_BlePeripheral, DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_BLEPERIPH_DONE);
  DMMPolicy_updateStackState(DMMPolicy_StackRole_WsnNode, DMMPOLICY_STACKSTATE_WSNNODE_SLEEPING);

and now BTool is unable to connect to the device.

However, I do not see any change in power usage. Does the BLE radio not actually turn off?

.Tim

RE: and now BTool is unable to connect to the device.

Apparently, that is not a repeatable result. I tried modifying the states and table in my app to do the same thing and could not get it to work. I returned to my modified example application and found that it too no longer disables BLE access when I have the initial default state set to _DONE. I did not make any further changes to that code, just started a new debug session (which still appears to link the final binary before downloading it).

Any ideas why I am getting inconsistent behavior?

.Tim

Hi Tim,

Sorry for the long delay in response here; by now you have probably moved on? Regardless, I'm hopeful Joakim may have additional input now that he has returned from holiday. Pop us an update on this topic if you get a chance.

Thank you,
Chris

Chris -

Thanks for checking up. I actually made some progress starting with the DMM WSNNode BLE5 example. I first modified the BLE peripheral to match our desired service/characteristics. Then I removed the WSN Node source and put our sub-GHz RF code in its place. I actually got it running (although not exactly as I expected/desired and I had a significant power level difference compared to our original sub-GHz code running on our board, but good enough to start).

Unfortunately, I then had a higher priority task and need to get back to where I was with this project. When I get back to that point and hopefully make some additional progress I might have more specific questions to followup.

.Tim