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.

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

Missing core v1 support for Sparkfun LoRa Thing Plus expLoRaBLE #470

Open
larswd opened this issue Aug 30, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Missing core v1 support for Sparkfun LoRa Thing Plus expLoRaBLE #470

larswd opened this issue Aug 30, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@larswd
Copy link

larswd commented Aug 30, 2022

@jerabaul29 and I are working on coding some sensors using the "Sparkfun LoRa Thing Plus expLoRaBLE" as a basis.
Unfortunately, these boards are seemingly only supported on the v2 core, and does not show in the board manager for the Arduino IDE when using the core v1.
For our purposes, we need the v1 core. Could it be possible to add support for this board in core v1 as well?

@jerabaul29
Copy link

👍 :)

@paulvha
Copy link
Contributor

paulvha commented Aug 31, 2022

The big(gest) issue of course is that BLE is NOT supported on V1 by Sparkfun. Looking at the different source codes, there is not much that would stop it on V1. Maybe some defines...

But (just out of interest and you can also drop me a personal mail on [email protected]) what is blocking you from using V2?

regards
Paul

@jerabaul29
Copy link

  • I was "traumatized" by working with the core v2 in late 2020, it was a big mess, but I agree the core v2 may be much better now...
  • when trying again the core v2 more recently, I bumped on a number of issues, for example something similar to what is described at: https://github.com/paulvha/apollo3/blob/master/OneWire_on_uart/1-wire_uart.odt
  • larger overhead; a problem when I need to use ~60% of the RAM for storing data before taking a series of FFT

But if it is unrealistic to use core v1 with LoRa, guess @larswd could give a try at the core v2.

@paulvha
Copy link
Contributor

paulvha commented Sep 1, 2022

Agree with your points. Indeed in V2 the overhead (mainly caused by the inclusion of Mbed) brings extra challenges. Not much can be done about that. Maybe in this project from V2 is a good fit.

regards,
Paul

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants