Fixes for issues with Device Groups - #2145
Conversation
This reverts commit 25bae6f.
|
Nice, tested, ready for merge? @divadiow can u check? |
|
My local testing has been flawless for 24 hours now, so this should be good to go. Tasmota wall switch controlling OpenBK pot lights. On/Off, colour and brightness. |
|
to this day I haven't experimented with device groups :o lazy GPT review of PR :) -Do not call DGR_CheckSequence() for ACKs. Use acked_sequence for ACK state, and keep it separate from received-message duplicate detection. I can post the full details if any of these warrant further investigation |
|
Tks, will pass along to Claude |
|
@divadiow Can you run it thru ChatGPT again, it should come back clean this time. |
|
sure. I have a 'suggested response' :)This is much improved and it fixes several of the earlier protocol concerns: ACKs are now unicast, ACKs no longer go through normal received-sequence handling, status requests are checked as a flag, receive buffer sizing is safer, and initial discovery now starts after successful init. I still think this needs a small follow-up before merge:
I would be happy with this after those are addressed, or if the full-status function is explicitly documented as a minimal power-only response rather than full protocol parity. |
|
not meant to be shouty. formatting fail |
Finally after 3 years looked into why the device groups worked inconsistenttly and compared the implementation to the reference implementation and found a couple of gaps.
The smoking gun was that
devgroupstatusnever listed the OpenBK devices, so this resolves that issue and the inconsistency while using it.