Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

When retrying CASE during commissioning, extend the fail-safe. #25595

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2023
Merged

When retrying CASE during commissioning, extend the fail-safe. #25595

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2023

Conversation

bzbarsky-apple
Copy link
Contributor

If we don't do this, we can get into a situation where our retries take longer than the fail-safe timer, so we are still retrying by the other side is not even listening anymore.

The changes here are as follows:

  1. Expose various bits on CASEClient and CASESession to allow us to compute how
    long it will take before we know whether the next CASE retry has succeeded or
    failed.
  2. Add a way for OperationalSessionSetup to notify its consumers that it's going
    to retry, and how long it expects it to take before it knows whether the
    retry has succeeded.
  3. Change DeviceCommissioner to extend the fail-safe when it's told that
    OperationalSessionSetup will retry.

Fixes #25581

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 9, 2023

PR #25595: Size comparison from 68082bd to 1d50469

Increases (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 68082bd 1d50469 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL (read only) 644425 644905 480 0.1
(read/write) 203688 203848 160 0.1
.bss 197088 197248 160 0.1
.debug_abbrev 930235 930248 13 0.0
.debug_aranges 87344 87376 32 0.0
.debug_frame 300044 300232 188 0.1
.debug_info 20267474 20274042 6568 0.0
.debug_line 2659773 2660770 997 0.0
.debug_loc 2802853 2804534 1681 0.1
.debug_ranges 282960 283272 312 0.1
.debug_str 3024079 3026281 2202 0.1
.strtab 378571 379152 581 0.2
.symtab 256624 256848 224 0.1
.text 536372 536864 492 0.1
Decreases (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 68082bd 1d50469 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL .rodata 105929 105921 -8 -0.0
Full report (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 68082bd 1d50469 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL 0 0 0 0.0
(read only) 644425 644905 480 0.1
(read/write) 203688 203848 160 0.1
.ARM.attributes 44 44 0 0.0
.ARM.exidx 8 8 0 0.0
.bss 197088 197248 160 0.1
.comment 194 194 0 0.0
.data 1480 1480 0 0.0
.debug_abbrev 930235 930248 13 0.0
.debug_aranges 87344 87376 32 0.0
.debug_frame 300044 300232 188 0.1
.debug_info 20267474 20274042 6568 0.0
.debug_line 2659773 2660770 997 0.0
.debug_loc 2802853 2804534 1681 0.1
.debug_ranges 282960 283272 312 0.1
.debug_str 3024079 3026281 2202 0.1
.ramVecs 780 780 0 0.0
.resetVecs 64 64 0 0.0
.rodata 105929 105921 -8 -0.0
.shstrtab 232 232 0 0.0
.stab 204 204 0 0.0
.stabstr 441 441 0 0.0
.stack 2048 2048 0 0.0
.strtab 378571 379152 581 0.2
.symtab 256624 256848 224 0.1
.text 536372 536864 492 0.1

@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple force-pushed the extend-failsafe-on-CASE-retries branch from 1d50469 to 0a28980 Compare March 9, 2023 18:13
@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple mentioned this pull request Mar 9, 2023
Closed
@bzbarsky-apple
When retrying CASE during commissioning, extend the fail-safe.
b67f169 
If we don't do this, we can get into a situation where our retries take longer
than the fail-safe timer, so we are still retrying by the other side is not even
listening anymore.

The changes here are as follows:

1) Expose various bits on CASEClient and CASESession to allow us to compute how
   long it will take before we know whether the next CASE retry has succeeded or
   failed.
2) Add a way for OperationalSessionSetup to notify its consumers that it's going
   to retry, and how long it expects it to take before it knows whether the
   retry has succeeded.
3) Change DeviceCommissioner to extend the fail-safe when it's told that
   OperationalSessionSetup will retry.
@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple force-pushed the extend-failsafe-on-CASE-retries branch from 0a28980 to b67f169 Compare March 9, 2023 18:22
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 9, 2023

PR #25595: Size comparison from 99cbba0 to b67f169

Increases (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 99cbba0 b67f169 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL (read only) 644465 644945 480 0.1
(read/write) 203688 203848 160 0.1
.bss 197088 197248 160 0.1
.debug_abbrev 930280 930293 13 0.0
.debug_aranges 87344 87376 32 0.0
.debug_frame 300048 300236 188 0.1
.debug_info 20268460 20275028 6568 0.0
.debug_line 2659917 2660914 997 0.0
.debug_loc 2802993 2804674 1681 0.1
.debug_ranges 282936 283248 312 0.1
.debug_str 3023875 3026077 2202 0.1
.strtab 378571 379152 581 0.2
.symtab 256624 256848 224 0.1
.text 536412 536904 492 0.1
Decreases (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 99cbba0 b67f169 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL .rodata 105929 105921 -8 -0.0
Full report (1 build for cc32xx)
platform target config section 99cbba0 b67f169 change % change
cc32xx lock CC3235SF_LAUNCHXL 0 0 0 0.0
(read only) 644465 644945 480 0.1
(read/write) 203688 203848 160 0.1
.ARM.attributes 44 44 0 0.0
.ARM.exidx 8 8 0 0.0
.bss 197088 197248 160 0.1
.comment 194 194 0 0.0
.data 1480 1480 0 0.0
.debug_abbrev 930280 930293 13 0.0
.debug_aranges 87344 87376 32 0.0
.debug_frame 300048 300236 188 0.1
.debug_info 20268460 20275028 6568 0.0
.debug_line 2659917 2660914 997 0.0
.debug_loc 2802993 2804674 1681 0.1
.debug_ranges 282936 283248 312 0.1
.debug_str 3023875 3026077 2202 0.1
.ramVecs 780 780 0 0.0
.resetVecs 64 64 0 0.0
.rodata 105929 105921 -8 -0.0
.shstrtab 232 232 0 0.0
.stab 204 204 0 0.0
.stabstr 441 441 0 0.0
.stack 2048 2048 0 0.0
.strtab 378571 379152 581 0.2
.symtab 256624 256848 224 0.1
.text 536412 536904 492 0.1

tcarmelveilleux
tcarmelveilleux approved these changes Mar 10, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@tcarmelveilleux tcarmelveilleux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggest making the API unconditional and just having the bodies of implementation #if conditionals.

@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2023
Open
@bzbarsky-apple
Copy link
Contributor Author

Suggest making the API unconditional and just having the bodies of implementation #if conditionals.

Filed #25601

@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple merged commit 8afc1f5 into project-chip:master Mar 10, 2023
@bzbarsky-apple bzbarsky-apple deleted the extend-failsafe-on-CASE-retries branch March 10, 2023 04:59
lecndav pushed a commit to lecndav/connectedhomeip that referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2023
@bzbarsky-apple
When retrying CASE during commissioning, extend the fail-safe. (proje…
1e20784 
…ct-chip#25595)

If we don't do this, we can get into a situation where our retries take longer
than the fail-safe timer, so we are still retrying by the other side is not even
listening anymore.

The changes here are as follows:

1) Expose various bits on CASEClient and CASESession to allow us to compute how
   long it will take before we know whether the next CASE retry has succeeded or
   failed.
2) Add a way for OperationalSessionSetup to notify its consumers that it's going
   to retry, and how long it expects it to take before it knows whether the
   retry has succeeded.
3) Change DeviceCommissioner to extend the fail-safe when it's told that
   OperationalSessionSetup will retry.
mwswartwout pushed a commit to mwswartwout/connectedhomeip that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2023
@bzbarsky-apple @mwswartwout
When retrying CASE during commissioning, extend the fail-safe. (proje…
16fc996 
…ct-chip#25595)

If we don't do this, we can get into a situation where our retries take longer
than the fail-safe timer, so we are still retrying by the other side is not even
listening anymore.

The changes here are as follows:

1) Expose various bits on CASEClient and CASESession to allow us to compute how
   long it will take before we know whether the next CASE retry has succeeded or
   failed.
2) Add a way for OperationalSessionSetup to notify its consumers that it's going
   to retry, and how long it expects it to take before it knows whether the
   retry has succeeded.
3) Change DeviceCommissioner to extend the fail-safe when it's told that
   OperationalSessionSetup will retry.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jmartinez-silabs jmartinez-silabs jmartinez-silabs approved these changes

@tcarmelveilleux tcarmelveilleux tcarmelveilleux approved these changes

@amitnj amitnj Awaiting requested review from amitnj

@anush-apple anush-apple Awaiting requested review from anush-apple

@arkq arkq Awaiting requested review from arkq

@carol-apple carol-apple Awaiting requested review from carol-apple

@chrisdecenzo chrisdecenzo Awaiting requested review from chrisdecenzo

@chshu chshu Awaiting requested review from chshu

@chulspro chulspro Awaiting requested review from chulspro

@cliffamzn cliffamzn Awaiting requested review from cliffamzn

@CodeChronos928 CodeChronos928 Awaiting requested review from CodeChronos928

@Damian-Nordic Damian-Nordic Awaiting requested review from Damian-Nordic

@dhrishi dhrishi Awaiting requested review from dhrishi

@electrocucaracha electrocucaracha Awaiting requested review from electrocucaracha

@emargolis emargolis Awaiting requested review from emargolis

@franck-apple franck-apple Awaiting requested review from franck-apple

@gjc13 gjc13 Awaiting requested review from gjc13

@harsha-rajendran harsha-rajendran Awaiting requested review from harsha-rajendran

@hawk248 hawk248 Awaiting requested review from hawk248

@jelderton jelderton Awaiting requested review from jelderton

@jepenven-silabs jepenven-silabs Awaiting requested review from jepenven-silabs

@jmeg-sfy jmeg-sfy Awaiting requested review from jmeg-sfy

@joonhaengHeo joonhaengHeo Awaiting requested review from joonhaengHeo

@jtung-apple jtung-apple Awaiting requested review from jtung-apple

@kcoppock kcoppock Awaiting requested review from kcoppock

@kkasperczyk-no kkasperczyk-no Awaiting requested review from kkasperczyk-no

@ksperling-apple ksperling-apple Awaiting requested review from ksperling-apple

@lazarkov lazarkov Awaiting requested review from lazarkov

@lpbeliveau-silabs lpbeliveau-silabs Awaiting requested review from lpbeliveau-silabs

@LuDuda LuDuda Awaiting requested review from LuDuda

@mlepage-google mlepage-google Awaiting requested review from mlepage-google

@mrjerryjohns mrjerryjohns Awaiting requested review from mrjerryjohns

@msandstedt msandstedt Awaiting requested review from msandstedt

@mspang mspang Awaiting requested review from mspang

@nivi-apple nivi-apple Awaiting requested review from nivi-apple

@robszewczyk robszewczyk Awaiting requested review from robszewczyk

@saurabhst saurabhst Awaiting requested review from saurabhst

@selissia selissia Awaiting requested review from selissia

@sharadb-amazon sharadb-amazon Awaiting requested review from sharadb-amazon

@tecimovic tecimovic Awaiting requested review from tecimovic

@tehampson tehampson Awaiting requested review from tehampson

@vijs vijs Awaiting requested review from vijs

@vivien-apple vivien-apple Awaiting requested review from vivien-apple

@woody-apple woody-apple Awaiting requested review from woody-apple

@xylophone21 xylophone21 Awaiting requested review from xylophone21

@younghak-hwang younghak-hwang Awaiting requested review from younghak-hwang

@yufengwangca yufengwangca Awaiting requested review from yufengwangca

@yunhanw-google yunhanw-google Awaiting requested review from yunhanw-google

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
app controller review - approved
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Re-arm the fail-safe for a longer period to deal with CASE retries
3 participants
@bzbarsky-apple @tcarmelveilleux @jmartinez-silabs