CC2642R: Product not discovered by Samsung Exynos 9609/9610/9611 chipsets

Hi Daan, 

Assigning an expert to comment.

Thanks, 
Elin

appreciated :)

Hi Daan,

1) Can you say what specific Samsung models you have tested with?

2) How did you test? Did you use a specific app? Were the phones able to detect other BLE devices? Did you double-check with a sniffer that the CC2642R device is advertising?

2) What version of the SimpleLink CC13x2/CC26x2 SDK are you using?

Hi Marie,

1. We have tested with Galaxy - A50, A51,We have heard same results for a Motorola One Vision (one that also uses the exynos chipset)
2. We have first tested with our own app, afterwards we have tried to find out what was up by using a bluetooth scanner, i think the android app was called 'ble-scanner', i can look it up with an android phone over here if you want more details upon that. Other phones are able to discover and connect with the peripheral.
3. That's quite an oldie what i found out: It was stack 2.00.03, (simplelink_cc13x2_26x2_sdk_3_10_01_11). Today i'm planning to update to latest (4.10.00.78 sdk, i guess it's stack 2.00.06 in there)

Sidenote -> We are able to provide updates through bluetooth for our customers, hope they have someone around them with another phone.

Sidenote 2 -> the A50 and A51 are both specced as 5.0 devices

Also cheers to you :)

Edit:
I've just verified with the android phones with app i'm using for discovery - it's called BLE Scanner

Edit 2:

I've just installed LightBlue (which i'm also using on my iphone) on the android device and also this app was not able to discover the device

Hi Marie,

Today I've compiled both simple_peripheral apps for SDK 3.30.00.03 and SDK 4.10.00.78. Both were not discovered by the phones with Exynos chipsets.

I'm starting to wonder what is up since the phones are able to discover some old bluetooth 4.0 products of ours.

The advertisement parameters for the 4.10.00.78 project do not differ from the ones i've sent before:

GapAdv_params_t advParams1 = {
  .eventProps =   GAP_ADV_PROP_CONNECTABLE | GAP_ADV_PROP_LEGACY | GAP_ADV_PROP_SCANNABLE,
  .primIntMin =   160,
  .primIntMax =   160,
  .primChanMap =  GAP_ADV_CHAN_ALL,
  .peerAddrType = PEER_ADDRTYPE_PUBLIC_OR_PUBLIC_ID,
  .peerAddr =     { 0xaa, 0xaa, 0xaa, 0xaa, 0xaa, 0xaa },
  .filterPolicy = GAP_ADV_WL_POLICY_ANY_REQ,
  .txPower =      GAP_ADV_TX_POWER_NO_PREFERENCE,
  .primPhy =      GAP_ADV_PRIM_PHY_1_MBPS,
  .secPhy =       GAP_ADV_SEC_PHY_1_MBPS,
  .sid =          0
};

I've used an iphone and another samsung galaxy with a snapdragon chipset, they both were able to discvover the device properly

Hi Daan,

Thank you for doing a test with the newest SDK.

I don't see any issue with the advertising parameters you posted. Since this is legacy advertising, please make sure the advertisement data length does not exceed the permitted limit.

Since other phones are able to discover the CC2642R device I don't think there is anything wrong with it. 

You could try disabling long range advertisements on the device?

I'm actually not sure what to tell you since I'm not an expert on debugging on the android side. Maybe there is an android developer forum where you could get more help?

Hi Marie,

I understand you refer to our android developers, we (me + android team) are currently trying to find out what is up, i have allready tested by disable the long-range advertisement set before, did not help me out.
Another question then related to this:
I've donwloaded the TI-starter app for my iphone to analyse the advertisement data

The current product (the one which we have issues with on our android phones) gives me the following fields:

Connectable: Yes
Local Name : 16-characteris pdoduct name
TX Power level: 5dBm

Service UUID's: 6ACC5540-E631-4069-944D-B*CA7598AD50

then an older product of ours with bluetooth 4.0 (CC2640)

Conenctable: Yes

Local Name: 14 characters product name

TX Power level: 0dBm

Service UUID's: 8E7F1A50-087A-44C9-B292-A2C628FDD9AA

The older product is visible / scannable on the android device, the newer not.
My question following -

if i'm using legacy advertisements, there are practically no changes between bluetooth 4.0 advertising an bluetooth 5.0 legacy  advertising ? or are there any?

Hi Daan,

The legacy advertising packets are the same, regardless of whether you are using Bluetooth 4 or Bluetooth 5. You can compare the packets e.g. by using a sniffer. 

You can check whether the address type has any impact? (Try using public address in both cases?)

Thank you for the update.