• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 54 subscribers
  • Views 427 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.

Original question:

CCS/cc1310: how to create the smartrf_settings_predefined.h and smartrf_settings_predefined.c files with smartRF Studio?

CCS/CC1310: smartrf_settings_predefined confusion

spanky
Expert 2710 points
Part Number: CC1310

Tool/software: Code Composer Studio

I've been struggling with this simplelink_cc13x2_26x2_sdk_2_40_00_81 update that has thoroughly broken everything (i'm in it about 3 solid days now to take previously running code and get it running on the new revE 1352 and SDK). I've sorted through most of it (compiler errors and general build issues), but as a result, it broke all the easylink stuff and in turn the smartrf_settings that I had previously got from smartrfstudio.

My previously working code is now not communicating on the radio side (tx from a 1310 to a 1352). I've tried to make sure all the settings are the same when exporting code from smartrf studio to the respective devices/projects, but I'm at a total loss for why its not working on the radio link. I've installed the packetsniffer on the 1352, but am not getting packets sniffed... I would be shocked if my 1310 is not actually sending any packets, so its more than likely I am not configuring the packet sniffer right.

My thoughts at this point are that the smartrf_settings_predefined.c/h are not being exported from smartrf studio, so I'm left with old (possibly incompatible?) files. I get the smartrf_settings files exported, just not the smartrf_settings_predefined files. Where are these predefined files coming from? In their header they say they are generated from an older smartrfstudio version. There are 80 different versions of this file in the SDK folder. And a similar number in the 13x0 sdk folder. How do I know which is compatible between devices, or how do I get a "clean": copy exported from smartrf studio?

Folks at TI - I've spent probably 95% of my time on this project doing completely unproductive stuff fighting your disconnected and convoluted tools and carefully navigating the breaking changes between SDK releases. I do appreciate that there is no shortage of documentation, but there is a huge tradeoff in quality over quantity. If I had this project to do over again, I would most certainly go with a different vendor.

  • 0
    Expert 2710 points
    Well for what its worth, this appears to have been a huge bug in CCS and/or git. I don't have any proof of this or way to recreate it, but this is what appears to have happened:

    Through some branching and merging, my .ccsproject file was updated. Specifically <codegenToolVersion value="18.1.5.LTS"/> and xdcToolsVersion=3.51.01.18_core. When I went to the properties of the project, these values were shown, so everything appeared current and good. I only found this when I went through a file-by-file compare of previous versions to figure out what the heck happened. I had skipped over reviewing this file because I verified the values from the settings in the UI... but it appears that the actual .ccsproject file in the current HEAD checkout was somehow an older version, but the settings in the project were new and correct. I guess there is a magical disconnect between the CCS UI and the files its supposedly based on. I closed and restarted CCS multiple times during this, so its completely baffling how this disconnect happened.

    I'm still at a loss for where to get the smartrf_settings_predefined files from in smartrf studio
  • 0 in reply to spanky
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points
    I have to look into the details tomorrow but I want to check a detail first: The heading state CC1310 but at the same time you are referring to simplelink_cc13x2_26x2_sdk_2_40_00_81 .

    Which chip and SDK are you working with since it looks like the information contradict?
  • 0 in reply to TER
    Expert 2710 points
    I'm on a 1352 with simplelink_cc13x2_26x2_sdk_2_40_00_81
    and a 1310 with simplelink_cc13x0_sdk_2_40_00_20

    Both are on easylink v2.40.03
  • 0 in reply to spanky
    Expert 2710 points
    Oh, and rev E on the 1352. I'm not sure about the 1310, but that was working before.
  • 0 in reply to spanky
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points
    Do you know if the SmartRF settings issue is for both CC1310 and CC1352 or just one of them?
  • 0 in reply to TER
    Expert 2710 points

    I think at this point my question is more along the lines of "where do the smartrf_settings_predefined files come from"

    That screwy git/ccs issue seemed to be the main culprit in my communication issue. That unsync'd file vs UI was particularly dastardly.

  • 0 in reply to spanky
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points
    smartrf_settings_predefined.c/h: These are files that contain code that is exported from SmartRF Studio but the file is a result of more than one setting export and then the exports are merged into one file. If you look at: dev.ti.com/.../

    you will see that this file contain both 50 kbps, 200 kbps and long range mode settings. Each of this comes from SmartRF studio and are merged into one file and some renaming are done to give each setting a good name.

    Hopefully the easiest in your case would be to copy the smartrf_settings from one of the examples in the new SDK for the device you are using into your project. Since the SDK contain 10 examples for each chip type and each example has a copy of smartrf_settings_predefined.c the SDK contains a lot of files with the same name. But if you look at the versions of smartrf_settings_predefined.c found under one chip type thaty should be equal.

    "Folks at TI - I've spent probably 95% of my time on this project doing completely unproductive stuff fighting your disconnected and convoluted tools and carefully navigating the breaking changes between SDK releases." I get the impression that some of this is caused by git issues at your end, something is outside our control. Yes, it's a lot of documentation and the amount will most likely increase when we introduce new features etc. Are you able to highlight the areas where you have found most issues with navigate the documentation and do you have some suggestions to how we could do it better?
  • 0 in reply to TER
    Prodigy 150 points

    Hello!

    I decided to go from simplelink_cc13x0_sdk_2_30_00_20 to simplelink_cc13x0_sdk_2_40_00_20.

    In my working project I copy files easylink*, smartrf_settings* and replace files smartrf_settings.* from SmartRF Studio 7 2.12.1.

    I get project with (EasyLink_init(&easyLink_params) != EasyLink_Status_Success).

    I replace file ".cproject" from example sdk_2_40 (now there are unclear parameters "<listOptionValue builtIn="false" value="SUPPORT_PHY_CUSTOM"/>" )

    I get project with (EasyLink_init(&easyLink_params) == EasyLink_Status_Success), but without Packet sending.

    I have to return to the previous version

  • 0 in reply to Orl Nick
    TI__Guru**** 317180 points
    Orl: Do you work with Spanky or is this a separate issue? If the latter, please post as a separate question on the forum.