LEAHI-DIALIN-LDT-2004

LEAHI-DIALIN-LDT-2004_Dialysate Composition - DD
LEAHI-DIALIN-LDT-2004_Dialysate Composition - DD
DENBUG-331: Duplicate Device Logs Uploading to Modaflx Connect

- add duplicate function for 2010

    • -0
    • +35
    /sources/device/DeviceController.cpp
merged staging into dry bicart branch and code is pushed

merged staging into dry bicart branch and code is pushed

New code pushed

New code pushed

Could you update all the overrides to use the generic method? So we don't need to maintain these on more than one place Broadcast -> cmd_generic_broadcast_interval_override others -> cmd_generic_ov...

Could you update all the overrides to use the generic method? So we don't need to maintain these on more than one place
Broadcast -> cmd_generic_broadcast_interval_override
others -> cmd_generic_override

You can check any of the other modules how to use them

This is not the code that is currently on staging, so I think you need to update it from there

This is not the code that is currently on staging, so I think you need to update it from there

fixed it

fixed it

This is a change from Zoltan and I am updated that into my local branch

This is a change from Zoltan and I am updated that into my local branch

for Dry Bicart , I have reserved the message ID long time back as 0x70 and its correct. I was confused after staging branch merged with my local branch, since all of my other message ID are used by...

for Dry Bicart , I have reserved the message ID long time back as 0x70 and its correct. I was confused after staging branch merged with my local branch, since all of my other message ID are used by other modules except BICART_DATA. please dis regard this question.

This is a merge issue. when I updated the code and aligned to staging , this all change happened. Need to check with Dara

This is a merge issue. when I updated the code and aligned to staging , this all change happened. Need to check with Dara

Add a blank line between functions.

Add a blank line between functions.

Is this staying? Is all of above replacing this class?

Is this staying? Is all of above replacing this class?

DENBUG-331: Duplicate Device Logs Uploading to Modaflx Connect

Address CR comments

    • -1
    • +9
    /sources/cloudsync/CloudSyncController.h
DENBUG-331: Duplicate Device Logs Uploading to Modaflx Connect

- Add new error message for cloudsync for log duplicates

- Add more parameters to 2010 signal

- add Switch case logic for 2010 reject reason. Logic to be implemented and discussed

    • -1351
    • +1369
    /sources/cloudsync/CloudSyncController.cpp
    • -331
    • +333
    /sources/cloudsync/CloudSyncController.h
    • -4
    • +12
    /sources/device/DeviceController.cpp
Based on the msg id, it should be here

Based on the msg id, it should be here

@zoltan , could you please confirm whether this is the correct place for BICART_DATA ?

@zoltan , could you please confirm whether this is the correct place for BICART_DATA ?

Please pull the latest staging and update the test configs regarding that. I think the dry bicart test config is already there

Please pull the latest staging and update the test configs regarding that.
I think the dry bicart test config is already there

updated to use the generic override. Both of you are correct, the generic override can be used. Since we pack the payload outside of the generic override, for this situation we don't pack the res...

updated to use the generic override.

Both of you are correct, the generic override can be used.

Since we pack the payload outside of the generic override, for this situation we don't pack the reset byte and therefore will stay as a U32 which satisfies the FW constraint. The other concern I had was that the FW would not reply back with a test ACK back to dialin with this cmd, thus causing a timeout in the generic override function. This is address as all messages in the lookup table in FW will reply back with a test ACK.

Therefore im okay using the generic override method

If Michael is right, then f/w is not expecting an override payload and so we shouldn't use the generic override payload structure.

If Michael is right, then f/w is not expecting an override payload and so we shouldn't use the generic override payload structure.

It handles different size of payloads, and requests without payload without having an issue, so I don't understand why would it cause an issue. you are sending a message with this msg id and this p...

It handles different size of payloads, and requests without payload without having an issue, so I don't understand why would it cause an issue.
you are sending a message with this msg id and this payload, if the FW is expecting that, then it will work.

Should I rename the cmd_generic_override to like cmd_generic_message_sender to be less confusing?

fixed writing over the error count override. Model ID isnt an override. Its a set as it does not revert back to another value. FW will be looking for only 1 U32 instead of a TEST_OVERRIDE_PAYLOAD_...

fixed writing over the error count override.

Model ID isnt an override. Its a set as it does not revert back to another value. FW will be looking for only 1 U32 instead of a TEST_OVERRIDE_PAYLOAD_T.

the generic override will cause the FW to always reject the value since the payload size is not what is expected.

Can't we use the generic override? You just need to update 3 fields: msg_id = MsgIds.MSG_ID_DD_SET_CONDUCTIVITY_MODEL_REQUEST entity_name = 'DD Coductivity sensor model request' override_text = 'S...

Can't we use the generic override?
You just need to update 3 fields:

msg_id = MsgIds.MSG_ID_DD_SET_CONDUCTIVITY_MODEL_REQUEST
entity_name = 'DD Coductivity sensor model request'
override_text = 'Sent' or ''

LEAHI-DIALIN-LDT-2004_Dialysate Composition - DD
LEAHI-DIALIN-LDT-2004_Dialysate Composition - DD