View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0001985T99X171.00 SKB EagleSW Issuepublic2025-07-04 16:56
Reporter(ALTech) JunGyu Kim Assigned To(SW) Willin Deng Due Date2024-08-30 15:17
PriorityhighSeveritys4-minorReproducibilityalways
Status closedResolutionfixed 
Summary0001985: Issue of pairing failure when attempting to pair another RCU while Kids RCU + another RCU is already paired
DescriptionHi Kinbay,

SKB reported an issue that while paired Kids RCU + another RCU, attempting to pair another RCU, pairing is failed.

FW : 515.542.22

reproduce step:
1. Pairing Kids RCU (KR01)
2. Pairing another RCU (BA01 / BA02 / SA02 / etc)
3. While paired 2 RCU, attempt to pairing another RCU
4. Pairing failed after about 20 seconds

If I remove Kids RCU on this case, another RCU's pairing can successfully.
I have checked the log, I can not see discovered log for new RCU.

// Pairing start
08-27 14:58:10.778 8032 8032 E BtvBtPairingService: sendBroadcastNaviLog action : com.skbb.intent.navilog.bluetoothrcu, function = pairing, state = start, reason = , name =

// New RCU was not found
08-27 15:38:38.884 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 00:13:7b:89:e0:25 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:38.962 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 40:19:20:8d:a6:27 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:40.087 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 40:19:20:60:00:02 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:42.497 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 40:19:20:60:00:01 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:42.642 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() b0:99:d7:bd:a6:f9 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:42.712 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 40:19:20:6b:6c:b6 device_type = 0x1
08-27 15:38:44.760 4396 4864 I bt_btif : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:201 LogMsg: btif_dm_search_devices_evt() 54:44:a3:42:b3:b1 device_type = 0x1
...

// Pairing end
08-27 15:38:58.254 8032 8032 E BtvBtPairingService: sendBroadcastNaviLog action : com.skbb.intent.navilog.bluetoothrcu, function = pairing, state = fail, reason = scan[33], name =

I have attached video and log file when the issue is occurred. Please refer it.

Please check this issue.
Thank you.
Kim
TagsNo tags attached.
Attach Tags

Users monitoring this issue

User List (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG , (ALTech) Sangmin Choi , (ALTech) SY Yoon , (ALTech) Wooshin Kang , (ALTech) Younkwang Jung , (Sales) Miya Wang , (SW) Kerwin Chen

Activities

(ALTech) JunGyu Kim

2024-08-27 14:55

developer  

20240827_log.log (2,344,729 bytes)

(ALTech) JunGyu Kim

2024-08-28 11:46

developer   ~0016590

Hi Kinbay,

Could you please help to check this issue?
FYI, INTEK box does not happen this issue.
SKB made a jira ticket : https://jira.skbroadband.com/browse/BPM-36584

Thank you.
Kim

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-08-29 16:23

developer   ~0016604

Hi JunGyu
 
=> INTEK box does not happen this issue.
We use different BT modules.
The Bluetooth module is too busy after pairing the kids' RCU and the normal RCU, so it can't discover the new RCU.
I checked the BT snoop log, and it seems that the BT module did not discover the new RCU.
 
BR,
Kinbay
image.png (225,277 bytes)   
image.png (225,277 bytes)   
btsnoop_2.log (21,631 bytes)

(ALTech) JunGyu Kim

2024-08-29 17:20

developer   ~0016606

Hi Kinbay,

How can we know the Bluetooth module is busy while paired Kid's RCU and normal RCU?
I have to explain to SKB, but it seems there is not enough clues to say that the Bluetooth module is busy and cannot discover a new RCU.

Thank you
Kim

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-02 16:58

developer   ~0016625

Dear Kinbay

We are investigating this issue, it seems to be related with "btm_ble_process_adv_pkt" & "btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont" APIs.
When it is correct to pair SKB RCU,
Two event is received both 'BTM_BLE_ADV_IND_EVT' & 'BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT' in "btm_ble_process_adv_pkt".
1. btu_hcif_process_event (HCI_BLE_ADV_PKT_RPT_EVT) > btm_ble_process_adv_pkt (BTM_BLE_ADV_IND_EVT)
2. btu_hcif_process_event (HCI_BLE_ADV_PKT_RPT_EVT) > btm_ble_process_adv_pkt (BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT)

But when issue is occurred, it is not received BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT.
So, it is not progressed anymore in below condition of "btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont".

  bool is_active_scan =
      btm_cb.ble_ctr_cb.inq_var.scan_type == BTM_BLE_SCAN_MODE_ACTI;
  if (is_active_scan && is_scannable && !is_scan_resp) {
    // If we didn't receive scan response yet, don't report the device.
    BTM_TRACE_ERROR("[ALT] %s: Waiting for scan response ", __func__);
    return;
  }

I guess that BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT event is sent from libeagle_bt.a library. So we can't debug in more detail for this status.
Please debug why BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT is not sent in case of paring ZemRCU and we also want to receive debug version libaray for libeagle_bt.a.
SKB request to resolve this issue until next build date (4th Sep evening), so this issue will be urgent issue.

Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-02 17:32

developer   ~0016626

Hi JunGyu
 
Based on #c16604 the bt snoop log
You can see many of "Rcvd LE Meta (LE Advertising Report) " in btsnoop_2.log for each scanned BT device.
However, the new RCU device is missing from the list.
So the problem is the BT controller didn't scan the new RCU.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-02 18:21

developer   ~0016627

Last edited: 2024-09-02 19:14

Dear Kinbay

I agree that sometime there is no information for new RCU.
But if we tested repeatedly, we can find MAC & adv_data informatino for new RCU in btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont API.
At that time, it can be received ony BTM_BLE_ADV_IND_EVT for new RCU and BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT is not received as previous #c16625.
I attached log information. new RCU MAC is "40:19:20:20:7d:27" and you can see hex ascii code for RCU name in adv_data (=D09424D4D5F424130325F443237 : BMM_BA02_D27)
Thank you. Best Regards.

09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btu_hcif: system/bt/stack/btu/btu_hcif.cc:388 btu_hcif_process_event: [ALT] HCI_BLE_EVENT 0x 2
09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btm : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:191 LogMsg: [ALT] btm_ble_process_adv_pkt: 40:19:20:20:7d:27
09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btm : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:191 LogMsg: [ALT] btm_ble_process_adv_pkt: 0
09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btm : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:191 LogMsg: [ALT] btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont: 1 0 1
09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btm : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:191 LogMsg: [ALT] evt_type 0x 13 / adv_data 02010603031218031980010D09424D4D5F424130325F443237
09-02 19:12:32.656 3922 4428 E bt_btm : system/bt/main/bte_logmsg.cc:191 LogMsg: [ALT] btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont: Waiting for scan response

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-03 09:26

developer   ~0016630

Hi JunGyu
 
Yes, I found your situation sometimes will get the new RCU.
But the failure rate is almost 50%, so this problem must be solved first.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter if you solve #c16625.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Wooshin Kang

2024-09-03 09:51

developer   ~0016632

Hi Kinbay,

1. Can you reproduce it your side ?
2. How did you get failure rate 50% ?

Thanks.

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-03 10:55

developer   ~0016633

Hi JunGyu
 
Attached log that I tested 10 times and only 5 times did I find the new RCU
BRM_SA02_B9D
20:44:41:3E:0B:9D
 
BR,
Kinbay
btsnoop_20240903_2.log (88,994 bytes)

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-03 13:05

developer   ~0016634

Dear Kinbay

I understand your opinion, but this issue should be fixed until this Wednesday evening because of SKB request.
Do you have a any idea to approch this issue ?

And I want to know it is correct that BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT is sent from libeagle_bt.a.
if it is, please provide debug library for libeagle_bt.a.

Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-03 13:48

developer   ~0016635

Hi JunGyu
 
I'm not clear what your point.
Are you mean this eagle_btm_ble_adv_pkt_check() function?
In the btm_ble_process_adv_pkt_cont() function we only add the eagle_btm_ble_adv_pkt_check() to check whether the received advertising device is zero len or not.
 
I can't find any function that is sending the BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-03 14:44

developer   ~0016636

Dear Kinbay

My question is whether there is any API to send BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT in libeagle_bt.a or not.
Because I try to find which API send BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT event with grep command. there is mached case with libeagle_bt.a
And please let us know how do you try to approch this issue in your side.

Best Regards.

(ALTech) Wooshin Kang

2024-09-03 15:28

developer   ~0016645

Dear Kinbay,

Please show source code of libeagle_bt.a.
From what you said, it doesn't seem to be important, so why don't you show it to me?
If you share source code, It will be helpfull us to debug it.

Thanks.

(SW) Kerwin Chen

2024-09-03 16:02

developer   ~0016647

Hi Mr. Wooshin Kang and Jong-Hwa Jung,

In case of 'BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT', I did grep in libeagle_bt.a source file.
There is no such keyword in the source file.
Please check result in attached picture.
image-2.png (6,908 bytes)   
image-2.png (6,908 bytes)   

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-03 16:32

developer   ~0016648

Hi JunGyu
 
I traced the source code and I found the legacy_evt_type that is directly from HCI_BLE_EVT in btu_hcif_process_event() not from the libeagle_bt.a
I also trace the event type in the BT snoop log. (btsnoop_20240903_5.log)
I found the [Event Type] is different when the issue is reproduced or not. (Attached screenshots)
=> No.2501= pair success => Event Type: Scan Response (0x04)
=> No.3440= pair fail => Event Type: Connectable Undirected Advertising (0x00)
 
So the flag sets an error when it is sent from the BT controller.
 
BR,
Kinbay
image-3.png (146,343 bytes)   
image-3.png (146,343 bytes)   
image-4.png (142,547 bytes)   
image-4.png (142,547 bytes)   
btsnoop_20240903_5.log (166,799 bytes)

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-03 20:03

developer   ~0016649

Last edited: 2024-09-04 09:21

Dear Kinbay

I appreciate to clarify who is sent BTM_BLE_SCAN_RSP_EVT.
( It was confusing part for us, because we can't vefify libeagle_bt.a )

I summerize our investigation result.
1. STB is not receiving the necessary event/information during paring stage.
2. Other manufacture's model, it is works correctly. I attached bitsnoop log information.
-> we try to pair repeatedly RCU1(40:19:20:20:7D:27) and RCU2(14:4E:34:F0:1D:5C)

* I report this issue is appeared with AI Sound Max yesterday, but I test again today, issue is not reproduced.
I'll update correct result again after more testing.

If it is different information in your side, please inform to us.

Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Wooshin Kang

2024-09-04 13:58

developer   ~0016654

Last edited: 2024-09-04 16:01

Hi kinbay,

I removed eable_bt.lib and related commit with lib and built test image.
I can connect third rcu and previous connected RCU is unpaired automatically.

Please check it urgently, we have only short time

Thanks

< Reverted Commit >

charmk@dev2-server04:~/work/BFX-AT100/system/bt$ git log
commit f5c63744b61976d07f0cab52b709d6d5f3c281e9 (HEAD -> develop)
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:49:19 2024 +0900

    Revert "BT stack stability improve"

    This reverts commit 318b6ff902fae95a813448fd7d812c2da30c2531.

commit 79987b8d364cb4094662ab0ee9ad146efaad4d1e
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:48:27 2024 +0900

    Revert "Fix RCU sometime does not repsonse when BT RCU reconnects quickly. It fixes the Google BT stack bug."

    This reverts commit 074161a098fb2ec6bcabbf0f116599718d2cf4e8.

commit 750d362795eb111babcf7c2375ddea415ca88637
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:21:38 2024 +0900

    Revert "add bt eagle_libs"

    This reverts commit d8f27ab3761ec6c87cf40ba6b2d5a704a2567c50.

commit 0981339e493914c996c4a4d3ca84d1cfe4b030f1
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:21:31 2024 +0900

    Revert "eagle_hid_disconnect"

    This reverts commit 97723f7c9cb951fd01e584ff7f76a0a2c260ab4a.

commit 6c27d30473e37f2a33775ae4589f3baf3eace3a6
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:19:55 2024 +0900

    Revert "Improve interoperability"

    This reverts commit 906c129884136e7fb17284fdd6db96f9cb1cb18f.

commit 5b4833b3c8bed74d03470d4cf708849d97576c86
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:19:45 2024 +0900

    Revert "Improve UEI RCU interoperability [2/3]"

    This reverts commit 83d7a33ffff90101f9a7f21d7520fc7fd7a289b9.

commit ff8684cf84bd01a67b538179b3d867f3079af588
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:19:18 2024 +0900

    Revert "Stop BT sound output when child limit is turned on.[1/3]"

    This reverts commit 367ea02a6fc979cb1d19f157b7aca20c67e60817.

commit 0e317926d09cf0acd0e8a1ef8451c0d4767f5336
Author: Wooshin-Kang <charmk@altech.kr>
Date: Wed Sep 4 13:18:01 2024 +0900

    Revert "[BPM-28432] Support SA02 RCU [3/4]"

    This reverts commit 1a0c2e33e9626869f23669279242bf9db09ff95c.

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-05 15:11

developer   ~0016667

Hi Wooshin
 
I reverted the 8 commits as you say in mantis and modified the com_android_bluetooth_hid_host.cpp to test.
But the issue still exists.
Please check what another difference is in your source code.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-05 16:45

developer   ~0016670

Dear Kinbay

Fisrt of all, we are very sorry for making confusing part.
Even if we were tested several times, but there was a wrong reported parts.
About test image which is removed eagle_bt.lib and related commit with lib,
when we test with only BA01 RCU, it looks works well. but if we try to test with BA02/03 RCU, the issue is still reproduced.
We will report investigation result after enough testing for next time.

I think you are focusing to recevie "LE Advertising Report" event correctly, is right ?
I checked how many times "LE Advertising Report" event is received with bitsnoop info, it seems that STB received the event more less times when issue is appreard.
And there is only "connectable undirested advertising" event type(0x00). STB don't receive "Scan Response" (0x04) event type.
As I know, "Scan Response" is response for SCAN REQUEST and SCAN REQUEST would be sent by BT firmware.
So I think it is necessary to debug whether BT firmware is works correctly in this case or not .
Could you contact BT manufacture and request to investigate this symbtom ?
I want to receive your opinion and if there is wrong information in my side, please let me know.

Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-06 13:56

developer   ~0016680

Hi JunGyu
 
We found the root cause of why the new RCU can't pair.
I attached the fix patch.
Please check it.
 
BR,
Kinbay
0001-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect.patch (1,371 bytes)   
From a86da304c47bdea9d510e62d47dce4a06b9aa952 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 13:52:31 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] [BPM-36584] [MT-1985] Fix Pair new RCU fail when connect with
 Kids RCU

    Issue Description:
        1. Pairing Kids RCU (KR01)
        2. Pairing another RCU (BA01 / BA02 / SA02 / etc)
        3. While paired 2 RCU, attempt to pairing another RCU
        4. Pairing failed after about 20 seconds

    Solution:
        1. Change BOS_KR01 slave latency from 133 to 149.

Signed-off-by: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
---
 bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
index 7c06658c02..c05963cc7c 100644
--- a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
+++ b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
@@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ static void bta_gattc_conn_cback(tGATT_IF gattc_if, const RawAddress& bdaddr,
               if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BOS_KR01", 8) == 0)
               {
                 LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND BOS_KR01");
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 133, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BRM_SA02", 8) == 0)
               {
-- 
2.25.1

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-06 15:58

developer   ~0016683

Dear Kinbay

Unfortunately, JunGyu and me had test with your patch, the issue is still appreared.
- Below is our test environment :
JONGHWA : Kids RCU + BMM-BA01, BMM-BA02, BRM-BA03
JunGyu : Kids RCU + BRM-SA02, BMM-BA02
If you provide usb upgradable f/w image to us, we will test again.

If you need any information, please inform to us.
Thank you. Best Regards.

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-06 17:57

developer   ~0016684

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
It's weird.
I will check what the difference is in my local.
I also upload my successful image to FTP.
release_by_fxn/tmp/mantis1985/usb_bfx-at100_V15.543.1t53_SDF.zip
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-06 18:52

developer   ~0016685

@Kinbay
We will report test-result for ftp firmware image.
And if you already found root-cause, please describe to us as well. even if it is not enough information, it is okay.

FYI, in our side, we also try to change parameter related with BT scan.
It is just for testing, if we increse below 2 parameters and we got better test-result except BA01.
( more 4 times sucesss of 10, but it should be not fixed this part for UEI rcu )
====== /bdroid_buildcfg.h
  BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN_LIMIT = 0x0012
  BTA_DM_PAGE_TIMEOUT = 36864
But I don't know how this parameter appect to scan process yet.
If there is updated information in our side, we will report to you as well.

Thank you for support. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-09 12:03

developer   ~0016687

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
Sorry for missing a file to modify for #c16680
I've attached the new patch.
 
About the BA01, as we know the BA01 is another known issue.
Even if the STB does not connect to another RCU, the BA01 is still difficult to connect.
I think we can split the issues.
 
BR,
Kinbay
mantis1985_fix.diff (1,133 bytes)   
diff --git a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
index 7c06658c02..c05963cc7c 100644
--- a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
+++ b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
@@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ static void bta_gattc_conn_cback(tGATT_IF gattc_if, const RawAddress& bdaddr,
               if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BOS_KR01", 8) == 0)
               {
                 LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND BOS_KR01");
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 133, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BRM_SA02", 8) == 0)
               {
diff --git a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
index 07ce727c4a..920405ed3b 100644
--- a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
+++ b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ using bluetooth::Uuid;
 
 //Vas River modiied for UEI BLE RCU, 2019/09/27
 //#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 10
-#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 50
 
 
 /******************************************************************************/
mantis1985_fix.diff (1,133 bytes)   

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-09 12:21

developer   ~0016688

Dear Kinbay

I appreciate quick response.
I'll test with new patch and report test-result again.
Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-09 14:32

developer   ~0016690

Last edited: 2024-09-09 14:33

Dear Kinbay

I applied your patch same as attached file for UI542, it looks work well except BA01 connect.
Our QA engineer will test a modified firmware in more detail.
If there is a updated information, we will inform to you.
And coudl you let me know what is root-cause & how do the patch appect to fix issue.
Thank you for support. Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG
mantis-1985-ui542.patch (1,600 bytes)   
project packages/apps/Bluetooth/
diff --git a/src/com/android/bluetooth/gatt/GattService.java b/src/com/android/bluetooth/gatt/GattService.java
index bbb31e6a0..575c1abf4 100644
--- a/src/com/android/bluetooth/gatt/GattService.java
+++ b/src/com/android/bluetooth/gatt/GattService.java
@@ -1377,7 +1377,7 @@ public class GattService extends ProfileService {
                     if (name.indexOf(devName) != -1) {
                         Log.e(TAG, "onClientConnected() connId=" + connId + " send connection update");
                         if (name.contains("BOS_KR01")){
-                            leConnectionUpdate(clientIf, address, 8, 8, 133, 1000, 0, 8, getAttributionSource()); /* 8*1.25 = 10ms, 133, 10s supervision timeout, min_ce 0, max_ce 8 */
+                            leConnectionUpdate(clientIf, address, 8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8, getAttributionSource()); /* 8*1.25 = 10ms, 133, 10s supervision timeout, min_ce 0, max_ce 8 */
                             Log.e(TAG, "BOS_KR01");
                         } else if (name.contains("BRM_SA02")){
                             leConnectionUpdate(clientIf, address, 9, 9, 266, 1000, 0, 8, getAttributionSource());

project system/bt/
diff --git a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
index 07ce727c4..48cbd47cd 100644
--- a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
+++ b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
@@ -77,7 +77,8 @@ using bluetooth::Uuid;
 
 //Vas River modiied for UEI BLE RCU, 2019/09/27
 //#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 10
-#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+//kinbay mantis 1985 
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 50
 
 
mantis-1985-ui542.patch (1,600 bytes)   

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-11 08:22

developer   ~0016694

Dear Kinbay

In addition, please let us know what is root-cause & how do the patch appect to fix issue as I wrote #c16690,
Thank you. Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-11 16:59

developer   ~0016696

Dear Kinby

Could you double-check below change of patch is related with BA01 RCU connection ?
-#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 50
Because it seems that BRM_Audio_BA01 is not found, and then RCU is not paired in our test.
I attached log information both cases.
- logcat-BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION-15.log : BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION is not changed (=15)
- logcat-BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION-50.log : BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION is changed same as patch (=50)

FYI, BA01 RCU MAC is 14:4e:34:91:0b:7e and BRM_Audio_BA01 is found from 14:4e:34:a0:d7:ce.
Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-11 17:04

developer   ~0016697

Last edited: 2024-09-11 17:06

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
First, the patch I attached at #c16680 does not affect this issue.
But the spec is 149 not 133 so that must be changed.
 
Second, I found some situations related to BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION.
 
(1)
In the BT Core spec, I found the value maximum is 0x30=48 (Attached screenshot)
So when I set the value to 50, it will overflow and set back to 2.
 
(2)
There are two difference functions that will use the value.
---
(a) btm_ble_start_inquiry()
(b) bluetooth::legacy::hci::GetInterface().StartInquiry() // only this func for (1)
---
But the arguments have different meanings.
I found that (a) needs to be bigger than (b).
(a) = 15
(b) = 10
It'll work too.
image-5.png (235,293 bytes)   
image-5.png (235,293 bytes)   

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-11 17:26

developer   ~0016698

Attached is the patch for testing.
mantis1985_0911.diff (1,529 bytes)   
diff --git a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
index 7c06658c02..c05963cc7c 100644
--- a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
+++ b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
@@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ static void bta_gattc_conn_cback(tGATT_IF gattc_if, const RawAddress& bdaddr,
               if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BOS_KR01", 8) == 0)
               {
                 LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND BOS_KR01");
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 133, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BRM_SA02", 8) == 0)
               {
diff --git a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
index 07ce727c4a..b3195fb193 100644
--- a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
+++ b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
@@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ using bluetooth::Uuid;
 #endif
 
 //Vas River modiied for UEI BLE RCU, 2019/09/27
-//#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 10
-#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_LENGTH 10
 
 
 /******************************************************************************/
@@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ tBTM_STATUS BTM_StartInquiry(tBTM_INQ_RESULTS_CB* p_results_cb,
       (uint16_t)(BT_DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE / sizeof(tINQ_BDADDR));
 
   bluetooth::legacy::hci::GetInterface().StartInquiry(
-      general_inq_lap, p_inq->inqparms.duration, 0);
+      general_inq_lap, BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_LENGTH, 0);
   return BTM_CMD_STARTED;
 }
 
mantis1985_0911.diff (1,529 bytes)   

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-12 12:20

developer   ~0016700

Last edited: 2024-09-12 13:02

Dear Kinbay

I tested attached mantis1985_0911.diff patch and test result is below ( 10 times )
====== test result : start Kids RCU + BA03 RCU connect status, and try to pair another RCU repeatedly
NO RCU result
1 BA02 OK
2 BA03 OK
3 BA01 FAIL - BRM_Audio_BA01 not found
4 BA02 OK
5 BA03 OK
6 BA01 FAIL
7 BA01 SMP_FAIL
8 BA02 OK
9 BA03 OK
10 BA01 FAIL
In test result, it seems that BA01 RCU is not connected in case of 2 RCU Pairing status (Kids RCU + another RCU)
If we try to connect BA01 RCU only without any RCU, it is paired well. (8 times sucess of 10 trying)
I attached log information when BA01 connect is failed.
====== BA01 connect failure test
Previous connect : Kids RCU (D0:1B:1F:33:B3:45) + BA03 (14:4E:34:F0:1D:5C)
I try to pair 3 times ( I initialized BA01 RCU with pressing '*' + '3' button before each testing ), and test result is failure.
12:40 - FAIL
12:42 - FAIL, oound BRM_BA01_B7E but BRM_Audio_BA01 is not detected
12:44 - FAIL, oound BRM_BA01_B7E but BRM_Audio_BA01 is not detected
BA01 RCU information is same as previous comment.
( BA01 RCU MAC is 14:4e:34:91:0b:7e, BRM_Audio_BA01 14:4e:34:a0:d7:ce)
Please check BA01 RCU connection in 2 RCU connect status.
If you need other information, please inform to us.

Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-19 12:26

developer   ~0016728

Dear Kinbay

Is there any updates ?
Best Regards.

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-19 14:19

developer   ~0016730

Hi Jong-Hwa

Does the BA01 work on the second source box?

BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-19 15:00

developer   ~0016733

Dear Kinbay

Do you want to know BA01 is paired well for another STB which is not paired with any RCU ?
After applying latest patch #c16698, if there is not any RCU pairing and we try to connect BA01 RCU only, BA01 RCU is paired well.
But we try to pair several kind RCU repeatedly after Kids RCU paired status, there is many failure about BA01 RCU only.
Please see test-result #c16700
If you need other information, please inform to us.
Best Regards

JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-19 15:37

developer   ~0016734

Hi Jong-Hwa

Sorry, my question is not clear.
Does the BA01 pair succeed to the another STB when it is already paired with kids RCU & another RCU?

BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-19 15:50

developer   ~0016735

Last edited: 2024-09-19 15:50

Dear Kinbay

I don't know your point correctly.
But if test-step is same as below,
* Pre-condition
STB 1 : paired 2 RCU ( Kids RCU + BA02 )
STB 2 : not paired any RCU
if I try to connect BA01 to STB2, it is paired well. and if we try to connect BA01 to STB1, there is many failure cases.
Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-19 16:38

developer   ~0016737

Hi Jong-Hwa

I mean does the INTEK box happen with this issue like the STB1 situation?

BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-19 16:59

developer   ~0016738

Dear Kinbay

I'm sorry for misunderstanding. I tested with INTEK B/D (15.542.132), test-result is same as following:
INTEK STB -> 15.542.132
====== test result : start Kids RCU + BA03 RCU connect status, and try to pair another RCU repeatedly
1 BA02 OK
2 BA03 FAIL -> sucess after retrying
3 BA01 OK
4 BA02 OK
5 BA03 OK
6 BA01 OK
7 BA02 OK
8 BA03 OK
9 BA01 OK
10 BA02 FAIL -> sucess after retrying
11 BA03 OK
12 BA01 OK

It looks there is some failure case, but 3 kinds of RCU are paired sucessfully if we retried.
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-26 10:30

developer   ~0016766

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
I'm still debugging.
We will contact the BT module vendor for help later.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-26 10:47

developer   ~0016767

Dear Kinbay

Thank you for updates.
And could you let me know how long time is necessary to fix this issue?
Because SKB request shedule for this issue repeatedly.
A rough schedule is fine.
Best Regards.

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-26 17:07

developer   ~0016768

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
The attached patches fix the BA01 won't be able to pair.
Please check it.
 
BR,
Kinbay
0002-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect.patch (1,123 bytes)   
From c683358a8d47835ceddb6ed891ac85d5fc5ef298 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:41:31 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] [BPM-36584] [MT-1985] Fix Pair new RCU fail when connect with
 Kids RCU and another RCU [2/2]

    Impact projects:
        1. system/bt
        2. vendor/amlogic/common

Signed-off-by: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
---
 wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h b/wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h
index 51f893b8..6e706596 100644
--- a/wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h
+++ b/wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@
 #define KERNEL_MISSING_CLOCK_BOOTTIME_ALARM TRUE
 
 //Vas modified for UEI BLE RCU, River 2019/09/23
-#define BTA_DM_PAGE_TIMEOUT 12288  //7.5 sec
+#define BTA_DM_PAGE_TIMEOUT 32000  //20 sec
 
 //Vas modified for UEI BLE RCU A2DP, Kerwin 2020/09/02
 #define BTM_SSR_INCLUDED FALSE //disable sniff subrating
-- 
2.25.1

0001-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect-2.patch (3,599 bytes)   
From bccec79c9f58c76b065b286bc09625b1149c7d8a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 16:39:25 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] [BPM-36584] [MT-1985] Fix Pair new RCU fail when connect with
 Kids RCU and another RCU [1/2]

    Impact projects:
        1. system/bt
        2. vendor/amlogic/common

Signed-off-by: Kinbay_Wu <kinbay.ty.wu@fii-foxconn.com>
---
 bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc   | 6 ++----
 stack/btm/btm_ble_bgconn.cc | 4 ++--
 stack/btm/btm_inq.cc        | 6 +++---
 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
index 7c06658c02..486f9f34f7 100644
--- a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
+++ b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
@@ -1163,19 +1163,17 @@ static void bta_gattc_conn_cback(tGATT_IF gattc_if, const RawAddress& bdaddr,
             if (send_update_ind == false)
             {
               send_update_ind = true;
+              LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND %s", (char*)bdname.name);
               if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BOS_KR01", 8) == 0)
               {
-                LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND BOS_KR01");
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 133, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BRM_SA02", 8) == 0)
               {
-                LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND BRM_SA02");
                 L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  9, 9, 266, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else 
               {
-                LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND %s", (char*)bdname.name);
                 L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  9, 9, 133, 1000, 0, 8 );
               }
             }
diff --git a/stack/btm/btm_ble_bgconn.cc b/stack/btm/btm_ble_bgconn.cc
index 2415b46822..7e7e140e4d 100755
--- a/stack/btm/btm_ble_bgconn.cc
+++ b/stack/btm/btm_ble_bgconn.cc
@@ -342,10 +342,10 @@ bool btm_ble_start_auto_conn() {
   ASSERT(p_cb != nullptr);
 
   const uint16_t scan_int = (p_cb->scan_int == BTM_BLE_SCAN_PARAM_UNDEF)
-                                ? BTM_BLE_SCAN_SLOW_INT_1
+                                ? BTM_BLE_SCAN_FAST_INT
                                 : p_cb->scan_int;
   const uint16_t scan_win = (p_cb->scan_win == BTM_BLE_SCAN_PARAM_UNDEF)
-                                ? BTM_BLE_SCAN_SLOW_WIN_1
+                                ? BTM_BLE_SCAN_FAST_WIN
                                 : p_cb->scan_win;
   uint8_t own_addr_type = p_cb->addr_mgnt_cb.own_addr_type;
   uint8_t peer_addr_type = BLE_ADDR_PUBLIC;
diff --git a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
index 07ce727c4a..fde161fe10 100644
--- a/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
+++ b/stack/btm/btm_inq.cc
@@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ using bluetooth::Uuid;
 #endif
 
 //Vas River modiied for UEI BLE RCU, 2019/09/27
-//#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 10
-#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 15
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION 20 //system timeout duration (second)
+#define BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_LENGTH 10 //UCI sent to BT controller x1.28 second 0~48 
 
 
 /******************************************************************************/
@@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ tBTM_STATUS BTM_StartInquiry(tBTM_INQ_RESULTS_CB* p_results_cb,
       (uint16_t)(BT_DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE / sizeof(tINQ_BDADDR));
 
   bluetooth::legacy::hci::GetInterface().StartInquiry(
-      general_inq_lap, p_inq->inqparms.duration, 0);
+      general_inq_lap, BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_LENGTH, 0);
   return BTM_CMD_STARTED;
 }
 
-- 
2.25.1

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-26 17:37

developer   ~0016769

Last edited: 2024-09-26 17:51

Dear Kinbay
I'll test and report test-result about applying latest 2 patch.
Thank you. Best Regards.

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-27 11:11

developer   ~0016771

Dear Kinbay
I tested with new F/W is applied latest 2 patch.
it seems BA01 RCU still not connected well.
====== test pre-condition : start Kids RCU + BA03 RCU connect status,
====== test procedure : try to pair another RCU repeatedly ( each rcu connection, we initialized RCU with pressing "*" + ""3" )
1 BA01 FAIL
2 BA02 OK
3 BA03 OK
4 BA01 FAIL
5 BA02 OK
6 BA03 OK
7 BA01 OK
8 BA02 OK
9 BA03 OK
10 BA01 FAIL
If test result is differenced with yours, please share your test-result & usb upgradable image.
Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-27 11:12

developer   ~0016772

Dear Kinbay
FYI, I attached USB log information in our side.
Best Regards

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-27 13:46

developer   ~0016775

Hi Jong-Hwa
 
Do you try to piaring againg when the BA01 fail?
Or can just try the BA01 for 10 times?
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-27 15:01

developer   ~0016776

Dear Kinbay
I try to pair BA01 RCU only repeatedly.
====== test pre-condition : start Kids RCU + BA03 RCU connect status,
====== test procedure : try to pair BA01 RCU repeatedly ( each rcu connection, we initialized RCU with pressing "*" + ""3" )
1 BA01 FAIL
2 BA01 FAIL
3 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
4 BA01 FAIL
5 BA01 FAIL
6 BA01 FAIL
7 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
8 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
9 BA01 FAIL
10 BA01 OK
FYI, I attached USB log information in our side.
Best Regards

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-09-27 15:13

developer   ~0016778

Hi Jong-Hwa,
 
The fail rate for BA01 is within the normal range.
As I know, BA01 is not stable for pairing is a known issue.
 
BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-27 16:29

developer   ~0016780

Dear Kinbay
Could you test for only 1 RCU pairing status in your side?
The failure rate of BA01 RCU connection is not same as 2 RCU pairing status.
====== test pre-condition : start BA03 RCU connect status,
====== test procedure : try to pair BA01 RCU repeatedly ( each rcu connection, we initialized RCU with pressing "*" + ""3" )
1 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
2 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
3 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
4 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
5 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
6 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
7 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
8 BA01 OK
====== connect BA02 RCU for testing
9 BA01 OK
====== connect BA03 RCU for testing
10 BA01 OK
FYI, I attached USB log information in our side.
If your test result is differced with ours, please inform to us
Best Regards

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-09-30 17:27

developer   ~0016786

Dear Kinbay,

As you know, this issue has remained unresolved for quite some time.
I understand this is a complex matter, but we would like to know how much time will be required to resolve it.
Because SKB has been repeatedly requesting a timeline for the fix.

I appreciate your continued efforts.
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kerwin Chen

2024-10-11 09:18

developer   ~0016829

Hi Mr. JongHwa Jung,

There are BLE and classic BT(A2DP) on BA01 RCUs.
It is more complicated than other RCUs.
Fii already ask help from BT chip vendor, but no update so far.

However, Fii had provided a solution to fix pairing issue with other RCUs.
Can you discuss with SKB to verify it first?
Thank you!

(ALTech) Wooshin Kang

2024-10-11 09:24

developer   ~0016830

Hi Kerwin,

Normally, SKB doesn't test Partially, so ALT will do test for other RCUS.
And, Mr JongHwa did test already for others.
Thanks.

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-10-11 11:47

developer   ~0016831

Dear Kerwin

we already report test-result of last patch to SKB and have a conversation how do we approch this issue 2 week ago.
But SKB still request to fix this issue including BA01 RCU at that weekly meeting.
If it is possible, please keep contact BT chip vendor.
Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-10-15 12:34

developer   ~0016843

Dear Kinbay & Kerwin

At last weekly meeting, SKB strongly request schedule for this issue.
Please make a plan to fix this issue with BT chipset vendor and also share to us.
I appreciate your effort.
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-10-21 14:56

developer   ~0016860

Dear Kerwin

As wechat comment, we expected that it could be checked status from BT chip vendor today.
Is there any updates from them ?
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kerwin Chen

2024-10-21 18:03

developer   ~0016864

Hi Mr. JongHwa Jung,

Fii had asked for several times today, but no response from Infineon yet.

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-10-23 14:03

developer   ~0016879

Dear Kerwin

Thank you for reply.
If there is any updates from infineon, please inform to us.
Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-11-22 17:46

developer   ~0017063

Hi Jong-Hwa,

We have modified a test image.
I sent the only one we have Kid's RCU to Shanghai for Infineon eng debug.
So please help to check the image.
By the way, Can you send me one more Kid's RCU for testing?
 
Please update the so file by following the command.
Then repeat the same test steps as last time. #c16776
---
adb wait-for-device root && adb remount
adb reboot bootloader
fastboot flashing unlock
fastboot reboot
adb wait-for-device root && adb remount
adb push libbluetooth_20241122.so /system/lib/libbluetooth.so
adb reboot
---

BR,
Kinbay
libbluetooth_20241122.so (6,671,292 bytes)

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-11-25 12:10

developer   ~0017071

Last edited: 2024-11-25 12:18

Dear Kinbay

We tested with attached libbluetooth_20241122.so.
it looks better test-result, but there is still connection failure case if we try to test repeatedly.
out test result is following :
FW base on 15.543.22
=RCU =TEST RESULT (1st -> 2nd -> ... -> 5th -> Battery Remove & Insert )
BA03 FAIL -> OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL
BA02 OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
BA02 OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
BA02 OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL -> OK
BA03 OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> OK
BA02 OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
BA02 OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL -> OK
BA03 FAIL -> OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL
BA02 OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
As above result, there is sometimes repeated connect failure case for BA01 only.
I attached log information, test-result & btsnoop hci log files.
If you need other information, please inform to us.
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG
btsnoop_hci_20241125.log (2,034,894 bytes)

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-11-25 12:16

developer   ~0017072

Dear Kinbay

I have a conversation internally, and then I'll report to you whether we can send one more ZemKids RCU or not.
Because we have to check how many Zemkids RCU we have.
Thank you. Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-11-25 14:32

developer   ~0017079

Update detail of https://btracker-cns.fii-foxconn.com/vaas/view.php?id=1985#c17063

The libbluetooth_20241122.so is changing the Update interval to 30ms.
If I only change the bta_gattc_act.cc the connection update will repeat and the config value will change back to the default value 9=11.25ms when the second connection update.
Check the situation in the btsnoop_20241122_4.log No.267 is 30ms and then No.277 is the 11.25ms.
So I also need to change the default value at btm_ble_api_types.h.

BR,
Kinbay
20241122.diff (2,047 bytes)   
diff --git a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
index 486f9f34f7..035c6017d9 100644
--- a/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
+++ b/bta/gatt/bta_gattc_act.cc
@@ -1166,15 +1166,15 @@ static void bta_gattc_conn_cback(tGATT_IF gattc_if, const RawAddress& bdaddr,
               LOG_INFO("LL_CONNECTION_UPDATE_IND %s", (char*)bdname.name);
               if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BOS_KR01", 8) == 0)
               {
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  8, 8, 149, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  24, 24, 149, 1000, 0, 8); /* 8*1.25 = 10ms, 133, 10s supervision timeout, min_ce 0, max_ce 8 */
               }
               else if(strncmp((char*)bdname.name, "BRM_SA02", 8) == 0)
               {
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  9, 9, 266, 1000, 0, 8);
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  24, 24, 266, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
               else 
               {
-                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  9, 9, 133, 1000, 0, 8 );
+                L2CA_UpdateBleConnParams(bdaddr,  24, 24, 133, 1000, 0, 8);
               }
             }
             else 
diff --git a/stack/include/btm_ble_api_types.h b/stack/include/btm_ble_api_types.h
index fe5a7fb8c2..630fcfeb07 100644
--- a/stack/include/btm_ble_api_types.h
+++ b/stack/include/btm_ble_api_types.h
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ typedef uint8_t tBTM_BLE_SFP;
 #define BTM_BLE_SCAN_WIN_MAX 0x4000
 #define BTM_BLE_EXT_SCAN_INT_MAX 0x00FFFFFF
 #define BTM_BLE_EXT_SCAN_WIN_MAX 0xFFFF
-#define BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN 0x0006
+#define BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN 24 //0x0006
 #define BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MAX 0x0C80
 #define BTM_BLE_CONN_LATENCY_MAX 500
 #define BTM_BLE_CONN_SUP_TOUT_MIN 0x000A
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ typedef uint8_t tBTM_BLE_SFP;
 
 /* minimum acceptable connection interval */
 #ifndef BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN_LIMIT
-#define BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN_LIMIT 0x0009
+#define BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN_LIMIT 24 //0x0009
 #endif
 
 /* minimum acceptable connection interval when there is bonded Hearing Aid
20241122.diff (2,047 bytes)   
image-6.png (137,877 bytes)   
image-6.png (137,877 bytes)   
btsnoop_20241122_4.log (31,199 bytes)

(SW) Kinbay Wu

2024-11-26 10:30

developer   ~0017085

Hi Jong-Hwa,

As we know the interval value of this version(#c17063) will affect the NUGU voice function.
Please also check if the NUGU voice function is still workable or stable.

BR,
Kinbay

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-11-27 10:42

developer   ~0017092

Last edited: 2024-11-27 12:34

Dear Kinbay

I applied 20241122.diff patch and test, but there is also connection failure case.
= FW base on 15.543.22
=RCU =TEST RESULT (1st -> 2nd -> ... -> 5th -> Battery Remove & Insert )
BA03 OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL
BA02 FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> FAIL -> OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
BA02 OK
BA01 FAIL -> FAIL
BA02 OK
BA01 OK
BA03 OK
BA01 OK
I attached log information & btsnoop hci info (20241127-Result_20241122diff.zip)
And I want to clear whether BTM_BLE_CONN_INT_MIN_LIMIT value should be changed in vendor/amlogic/commom/wifi_bt/bluetooth/broadcom/btbuild/bdroid_buildcfg.h instead of system/bt/stack/include/btm_ble_api_types.h .
if you need other informaiton, please inform to us.
Best Regards.
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2024-12-12 14:36

developer   ~0017156

Dear Kinbay

As we reported via e-mail, if we set 30ms interval, it seems there is wrong key sequnce process with BA01 RCU.
There is below problem to use BA01 RCU.
- if we press channel/volume key repeatedly, Key is not working during a fews seconds and then a recevied key is worked later
- sometimes, BA01 RCU is disconnected.
Please watch attaced movie clip.
If you have updated information about this issue, please inform to us.
Thank you. Best Regards.

JONGHWA/jUNG
BA01_30ms.mp4 (24,821,465 bytes)   

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2025-01-13 16:59

developer   ~0017251

Dear kerwin & Kinbay

From Infineon Korea(Leo.Kim), I heard that Zentron DS(ds_lin@zenitron.com.tw) request to you for testing after setup test environment same as below BT stack modification, is right ?
1. First BLE RCU connection : initial connection interval value = 7.5ms
2. Second BLE RCU connection : connection interval = 15ms
3. A2DP connection : connection interval = 250ms and disable BLE scan
4. after A2DP connection : connection interval value = 7.5ms and enable BLE scan

I try to setup test environment, but I guess it has to modify BT stack a lot.
Could you let me know there is any updates for above request in foxconn side ?
Best Regards
JONGHWA/JUNG

(ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG

2025-01-16 12:38

developer   ~0017259

Dear Kerwin & Kinbay

Is there any updaes ?
Please update today's 4:00 PM (Korean time) about current status in more details.
Thank you. Best Regards.

JONGHWA/JUNG

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2024-08-27 14:55 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim New Issue
2024-08-27 14:55 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Status new => assigned
2024-08-27 14:55 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Assigned To => (SW) Kinbay Wu
2024-08-27 14:55 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim File Added: 20240827_154717.mp4
2024-08-27 14:55 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim File Added: 20240827_log.log
2024-08-27 14:56 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Issue Monitored: (ALTech) Wooshin Kang
2024-08-27 14:56 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Issue Monitored: (ALTech) Younkwang Jung
2024-08-27 14:56 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Issue Monitored: (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG
2024-08-27 14:56 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Issue Monitored: (ALTech) Sangmin Choi
2024-08-27 14:56 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Issue Monitored: (ALTech) SY Yoon
2024-08-27 16:49 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Priority normal => high
2024-08-27 16:49 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Due Date 2024-09-06 15:17 => 2024-08-30 15:17
2024-08-28 11:46 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Note Added: 0016590
2024-08-29 16:23 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016604
2024-08-29 16:23 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: image.png
2024-08-29 16:23 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: btsnoop_2.log
2024-08-29 17:20 (ALTech) JunGyu Kim Note Added: 0016606
2024-09-02 16:58 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016625
2024-09-02 17:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016626
2024-09-02 18:21 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016627
2024-09-02 18:21 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BFX-AT100_20240902-190947.zip
2024-09-02 19:14 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016627
2024-09-03 09:26 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016630
2024-09-03 09:51 (ALTech) Wooshin Kang Note Added: 0016632
2024-09-03 10:55 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016633
2024-09-03 10:55 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: btsnoop_20240903_2.log
2024-09-03 13:05 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016634
2024-09-03 13:48 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016635
2024-09-03 14:44 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016636
2024-09-03 15:28 (ALTech) Wooshin Kang Note Added: 0016645
2024-09-03 16:02 (SW) Kerwin Chen Note Added: 0016647
2024-09-03 16:02 (SW) Kerwin Chen File Added: image-2.png
2024-09-03 16:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016648
2024-09-03 16:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: image-3.png
2024-09-03 16:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: image-4.png
2024-09-03 16:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: btsnoop_20240903_5.log
2024-09-03 20:03 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016649
2024-09-03 20:03 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: othermanufacture_btsnoop_hci_20240903.log
2024-09-04 09:21 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016649
2024-09-04 13:58 (ALTech) Wooshin Kang Note Added: 0016654
2024-09-04 16:01 (ALTech) Wooshin Kang Note Edited: 0016654
2024-09-05 15:11 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016667
2024-09-05 16:45 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016670
2024-09-06 13:56 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016680
2024-09-06 13:56 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: 0001-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect.patch
2024-09-06 15:58 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016683
2024-09-06 17:57 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016684
2024-09-06 18:52 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016685
2024-09-09 12:03 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016687
2024-09-09 12:03 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: mantis1985_fix.diff
2024-09-09 12:21 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016688
2024-09-09 14:32 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016690
2024-09-09 14:32 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: mantis-1985-ui542.patch
2024-09-09 14:33 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016690
2024-09-11 08:22 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016694
2024-09-11 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016696
2024-09-11 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: logcat-BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION.zip
2024-09-11 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION-50.jpg
2024-09-11 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BTIF_DM_DEFAULT_INQ_MAX_DURATION-15.jpg
2024-09-11 17:04 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016697
2024-09-11 17:04 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: image-5.png
2024-09-11 17:06 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Edited: 0016697
2024-09-11 17:26 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016698
2024-09-11 17:26 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: mantis1985_0911.diff
2024-09-12 12:20 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016700
2024-09-12 12:20 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: logcat-mantis1985_0911-BA01connectFailure.zip
2024-09-12 12:57 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016700
2024-09-12 13:02 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016700
2024-09-19 12:26 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016728
2024-09-19 14:19 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016730
2024-09-19 15:00 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016733
2024-09-19 15:37 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016734
2024-09-19 15:50 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016735
2024-09-19 15:50 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016735
2024-09-19 16:38 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016737
2024-09-19 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016738
2024-09-26 10:30 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016766
2024-09-26 10:47 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016767
2024-09-26 17:07 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016768
2024-09-26 17:07 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: 0002-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect.patch
2024-09-26 17:07 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: 0001-BPM-36584-MT-1985-Fix-Pair-new-RCU-fail-when-connect-2.patch
2024-09-26 17:37 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016769
2024-09-26 17:51 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0016769
2024-09-27 11:11 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016771
2024-09-27 11:12 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016772
2024-09-27 11:12 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BFX-AT100_20240927-115302.zip
2024-09-27 13:46 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016775
2024-09-27 15:01 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016776
2024-09-27 15:01 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BFX-AT100_20240927-153548.zip
2024-09-27 15:13 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0016778
2024-09-27 16:29 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016780
2024-09-27 16:29 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BFX-AT100_20240927-170721.zip
2024-09-30 07:37 (ALTech) SY Yoon Issue Monitored: (Sales) Miya Wang
2024-09-30 07:37 (ALTech) SY Yoon Issue Monitored: (SW) Kerwin Chen
2024-09-30 17:27 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016786
2024-10-11 09:18 (SW) Kerwin Chen Note Added: 0016829
2024-10-11 09:24 (ALTech) Wooshin Kang Note Added: 0016830
2024-10-11 11:47 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016831
2024-10-15 12:34 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016843
2024-10-21 14:56 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016860
2024-10-21 18:03 (SW) Kerwin Chen Note Added: 0016864
2024-10-23 14:03 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0016879
2024-11-22 17:46 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0017063
2024-11-22 17:46 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: libbluetooth_20241122.so
2024-11-25 12:10 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017071
2024-11-25 12:10 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: btsnoop_hci_20241125.log
2024-11-25 12:10 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: tes-result-20241125.xlsx
2024-11-25 12:10 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BFX-AT100_20241125-113623.zip
2024-11-25 12:16 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017072
2024-11-25 12:18 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0017071
2024-11-25 14:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0017079
2024-11-25 14:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: 20241122.diff
2024-11-25 14:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: image-6.png
2024-11-25 14:32 (SW) Kinbay Wu File Added: btsnoop_20241122_4.log
2024-11-26 10:30 (SW) Kinbay Wu Note Added: 0017085
2024-11-27 10:42 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017092
2024-11-27 10:42 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: 20241127-Result_20241122diff.zip
2024-11-27 12:34 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Edited: 0017092
2024-12-12 14:36 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017156
2024-12-12 14:36 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG File Added: BA01_30ms.mp4
2025-01-13 16:59 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017251
2025-01-16 12:38 (ALTech) Jong-Hwa JUNG Note Added: 0017259
2025-04-07 10:18 (SW) Kerwin Chen Assigned To (SW) Kinbay Wu => (SW) Willin Deng
2025-07-04 16:56 (PM) Sheila Tu Status assigned => closed
2025-07-04 16:56 (PM) Sheila Tu Resolution open => fixed