<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Jef Driesen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jef@libdivecomputer.org" target="_blank">jef@libdivecomputer.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">On 2014-06-25 14:22, Venkatesh Shukla wrote:<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">
I have been working on bringing libdivecomputer on android.<br>
I have started with support for ftdi-chipset based divecomputers. For<br>
talking with ftdi based devices on android, I have implemented<br>
serial_ftdi.c. . I have tried to implement all the the necessary functions.<br>
Though some of them are left out due to their unavailability in libftdi.<br>
<br>
These left out functions are<br>
<br></div>
1. serial_set_break - This is used only in reefnet_sensus_pro<div class=""><br>
hanshaking. I do not know if it uses ftdi chipset. If it does, it would<br>
become important to implement this function. In the present implementation,<br>
it remains unusable.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
Reefnet uses the Prolific pl2303 chipset, so it's not really an issue. The Sensus Pro is a pretty outdated model too, so there will be very few people who still have one.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
2. serial_send_break - I could not find any usage of this function in<br>
libdivecomputer.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Correct. It's not used anywhere.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
3. serial_get_transmitted - Even though the received bytes in the buffer<div class=""><br>
can be accessed, I couldn't find any way to get the transmitted bytes. This<br>
function is used internally for logging. Returns -1 as it is not<br>
implemented.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
It doesn't return the number of transmitted bytes, but the number of bytes that are currently present in the serial port buffer. Nowadays, we always call tcdrain when writing data, so this value should always be zero. This used to be different. Anyway, it's not an important function and it might even get removed in the future. So an implementation that always return 0 would be fine.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">
Changes made for building libdivecomputer for android are<br>
<br></div>
1. Check for presence of libftdi1<br>
2. serial_ftdi.c is compiled and used instead of serial_posix.c<br>
3. libftdi1 is included in Libs.private in libdivecomputer.pc<div class=""><br>
<br>
All these changes can be viewed here<br></div>
<<a href="https://github.com/venkateshshukla/libdivecomputer" target="_blank">https://github.com/<u></u>venkateshshukla/<u></u>libdivecomputer</a>>. I have been testing<div class=""><br>
it with universal script and subsurface-android. Results have been<br>
encouraging.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
I have tested your code on Linux, with an OSTC3 (or was it an OSTC2, don't remember), and it worked fine. I didn't had time to review it properly.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Thank you. I hope to clean out the bugs as soon as possible and
integrate the android code to libdivecomputer<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">
Now, toward providing a workable API for android, I have following points<br>
in mind. These were mentioned by Jef in an earlier mail.<br>
<br></div>
1. Support for only ftdi devices are implemented for now. But support<div class=""><br>
for other chipsets need to be included later on. Hence, serial_ftdi.c alone<br>
is not enough. We need a serial_android.c which will redirect calls to<br>
respective chipset specific scripts.<br></div>
2. I have come to the conclusion that for android, it will be best if we<div class=""><br>
pass the file descriptor of the USB device after acquiring the necessary<br>
permissions. This fd can be used to create a libusb_device and subsequently<br>
all USB related features can be accessed. For making a libusb_device from<br>
file descriptor obtained from android, I had tweaked libusb. This tweaked<br>
version is present here ( <a href="https://github.com/venkateshshukla/libusb" target="_blank">https://github.com/<u></u>venkateshshukla/libusb</a> ).<br>
This libusb_device could be used to obtain VID and PID and then control can<br>
then be branched accordingly to ftdi, pl2303, cp210x and other chipset<br>
specific scripts on android.<br></div>
3. We will require a generalized mechanism for passing parameters. This<div class=""><br>
is especially needed now as we have several branches - Normal TTY usage (<br>
posix/win32 , path to the device), android (file descriptor) and Bluetooth<br>
address.<br>
<br>
Please provide your thoughts on the above points. Also any other thing that<br>
I should keep in mind for android API?<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
Originally, the solution I had in mind for the different transport types (serial, irda, usb and bluetooth), was to introduce a specific data structure for each transport type:<br>
<br>
typedef dc_params_serial_t {<br>
const char *devname;<br>
} dc_params_serial_t;<br>
<br>
typedef dc_params_usb_t {<br>
unsigned int vid;<br>
unsigned int pid;<br>
} dc_params_usb_t;<br>
<br>
typedef dc_params_bluetooth_t {<br>
unsigned char address[6];<br>
} dc_params_bluetooth_t;<br>
<br>
dc_status_t<br>
dc_device_open (..., dc_descriptor_t *descriptor, const void *params);<br>
<br>
The application would then have to pass the appropriate data structure to the dc_device_open function, depending on the transport type indicated by the device descriptor:<br>
<br>
dc_params_serial_t serial;<br>
dc_params_usb_t usb;<br>
dc_params_bluetooth_t bluetooth;<br>
<br>
switch (dc_descriptor_get_transport(<u></u>descriptor)) {<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_SERIAL:<br>
serial.devname = ...;<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, &serial);<br>
break;<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_USB:<br>
usb.vid = ...;<br>
usb.pid = ...;<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, &usb);<br>
break;<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_BLUETOOTH:<br>
bluetooth.address = ...;<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, &bluetooth);<br>
break;<br>
}<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I was thinking something like this.</div><div><div><br></div><div>typedef union dc_param_t {</div><div> const char *devname; // Normal Serial</div><div> int fd; // Android</div>
<div> unsigned char mac_addr[6]; // Bluetooth</div><div>} dc_param_t;</div><div><br></div><div>typedef struct dc_addr_t {</div><div> dc_transport_t transport;</div><div> dc_param_t param;</div><div>} dc_addr_t;</div>
<div><br></div><div>dc_status_t</div><div>dc_device_open (dc_device_t **out, dc_context_t *context, dc_descriptor_t *descriptor, const dc_addr_t *addr);</div><div><br></div><div>dc_addr_t *dev_addr = (dc_addr_t *) malloc (sizeof (dc_addr_t));</div>
<div>switch (dc_descriptor_get_transport(descriptor)) {</div><div>case DC_TRANSPORT_SERIAL:</div><div> dev_addr->transport = DC_TRANSPORT_SERIAL;</div><div> dev_addr->param.devname = "/path/to/tty";</div>
<div> break;</div><div>case DC_TRANSPORT_USB:</div><div> dev_addr->transport = DC_TRANSPORT_USB;</div><div> dev_addr->param.fd = XX; // File descriptor obtained from android</div><div> break;</div><div>case DC_TRANSPORT_BLUETOOTH:</div>
<div> dev_addr->transport = DC_TRANSPORT_USB</div><div> dev_addr->param.mac_addr = ...;</div><div> break;</div><div>}</div><div>dc_device_open(..., descriptor, dev_addr);</div></div><div><br></div><div>The case of USB above is for Android usage as explained below.<br>
</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
Although this will certainly work, there are some drawbacks:<br>
<br>
Ideally libdivecomputer should provide some api to enumerate serial, usb and bluetooth devices. When the user chooses a device that uses serial communication, you want to be able to show a list with all serial ports. The same goes for usb and bluetooth communication. But for some transport types like irda sockets (and maybe also bluetooth sockets) you need to open a socket before you can enumerate the available devices. But as long as the backend code opens the socket internally, this functionality can't be exposed to the application. Currently the USB (Atomics Cobalt) and IrDA (Uwatec Smart) based backends do work around this problem by performing the discovery internally, and pick the device that looks like the dive computer (e.g based on its name, USB VID/PID, etc). But this heuristics isn't perfect and can certainly fail. For example when connecting two identical dive computers, or when some other usb-serial gadget with the same USB VID/PID (not unlikely with simple usb-serial cables using the stock ftdi/pl2303 VID/PID) is connected. The heuristics will have to decide which device to pick (e.g. the first one), but that might be the wrong choice. Yes, I'm aware this is a corner case, but not impossible.<br>
<br>
It's also not clear to me how this solution should deal with multiple implementations of a single transport. For Android, there'll be multiple implementations for serial communication, one for each chipset (ftdi, pl2303, cdc-acm, etc). But how do you decide which chipset to pick? The device backend doesn't always have this information. For example for Suunto devices,there are several cables on the market using different usb-serial chipsets. So there is no one to one mapping between devices and usb-serial chipsets.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For usage of usb divecomputers on Android, the question of
enumeration wouldn't necessarily arise. It is provided by android
and would be used in the pre-libdivecomputer-usage stage (see step 0
below) in order to get the file descriptor which would then be
passed on to libdivecomputer. Also connecting multiple USB devices
on Android would not be a common phenomenon.<br>
<br>
If still enumeration is needed, one could use libusb to get a list
of all usb devices ( libusb_get_device_list ). This is a compulsory
initial steps in any libusb related operations and is shown below
(step 4).<br>
<br>
The steps for usage of libdivecomputer on android as I have thought
of are:<br>
<blockquote></blockquote></div></div></div>0. Android application lists the devices. User chooses
his divecomputer. The application asks for permission to use it.
On getting permission, the application acquires the file
descriptor of the Usb Device attached. It is then passed to
libdivecomputer for opening the device.<br>1. The application makes an appropriate addr and adds data to it.
Then calls dc_device_open with this addr.<br>dc_addr_t *addr = (dc_addr_t *) malloc(sizeof(dc_addr_t));<br>addr->transport = DC_TRANSPORT_USB;<br>addr->param.fd = usb_fd;<br>dc_device_open(&device, context, descriptor, addr);<br>
2. The dc_device_open looks for the device specific opening code
(ex. hw_ostc3_open) and finally reaches serial_open of android.<br>3. serial_open checks if bluetooth is to be used or usb.<br>int<br>serial_open (serial_t **out, dc_context_t *context, const
dc_addr_t *addr)<br>{<br> if (addr->transport == DC_TRANSPORT_USB)<br> serial_open_usb (out, context, addr->param.fd;<br> else if (addr->transport == DC_TRANSPORT_BLUETOOTH)<br> serial_open_bt (out, context, addr->param.mac_addr;<br>
else<br> return -1;<br>}<br><br>4. If transport type is usb, make a libusb_device with the file
descriptor.<br>int<br>serial_open_usb (serial_t **out, dc_context_t *context, int fd)<br>{<br> int i, n, r;<br> libusb_init(NULL);<br> libusb_device *dev, **devs;<br> struct libusb_device_descriptor desc;<br>
n = libusb_get_device_list (NULL, &devs);<br> for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {<br> dev = devs[i];<br> libusb_get_device_descriptor(dev, &desc);<br> if (is_dev_recognized( desc.idVendor, desc.idProduct) {<br>
switch (get_dc_chipset(desc_idVendor, desc.idProduct)
{<br> case FTDI:<br> return serial_open_ftdi(out, context, dev);<br> case PL2303:<br> return serial_open_pl2303 (out, context, dev);<br> case CP210X:<br>
return serial_open_cp210x (out, context, dev);<br> default:<br> return -1; // Chipset not yet supported<br> }<br> }<br> }<br> return -2; // No recognized usb device found<br>
}<br><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>
Checks have been ignored for brevity.</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote><blockquote>
</blockquote>
The multiple-interfaces question is resolved because we can extract
the vid pid of the chip directly. And this is used for choosing the
chipset specific function. There is no manufacturer information
needed.<br>
I might be wrong or missing something. Does using different cables
with different usb-serial chipset change the vid pid of the usb
device?<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
The next thing that comes to my mind is a solution where the application opens the appropriate "transport "itself, and passes an instance of an abstract transport object to the dc_device_open function:<br>
<br>
dc_serial_t *serial = NULL;<br>
dc_usb_t *usb = NULL;<br>
dc_bluetooth_socket_t *bluetooth = NULL;<br>
<br>
switch (dc_descriptor_get_transport(<u></u>descriptor)) {<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_SERIAL:<br>
#ifdef ANDROID<br>
dc_serial_{ftdi,pl2303,...}_<u></u>open(&serial, fd);<br>
#else<br>
dc_serial_open(&serial, name);<br>
#endif<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, serial);<br>
break;<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_USB:<br>
dc_usb_open(&usb, vid, pid);<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, usb);<br>
break;<br>
case DC_TRANSPORT_BLUETOOTH:<br>
dc_bluetooth_socket_open(&<u></u>bluetooth, ...);<br>
dc_bluetooth_socket_discovery(<u></u>bluetooth, ...);<br>
dc_bluetooth_socket_connect(<u></u>bluetooth, address);<br>
dc_device_open(..., descriptor, bluetooth);<br>
break;<br>
}<br>
<br>
This would allow multiple implementations of a transport, as long as each of them implements the same interface, but that's easy. It also solves the discovery problem, because the low-level transport interface is now available to the application.<br>
<br>
But unfortunately it also introduces a new problem. Take a look at the USB transport. Now the application suddenly needs to know which USB VID/PID to use. Previously the device backend took care of that internally (with the caveat mentioned earlier). For example the Atomic Cobalt uses the VID/PID 0x0471/0x0888. Right now the application doesn't need to know this, because the backend opens the usb device that matches these number. The same thing happens for Uwatec Smart, where the backend discovers the IrDA devices in range, and connects to first one that matches the known device names. How do we deal with this here?<br>
<br>
All ideas are welcome!<span class=""><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Jef<br></font></span></blockquote></div><div><br></div>-- <br>Venkatesh Shukla<br>
</div></div>