Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

er9x is the best known firmware. It has a superb range of features and is well supported by the community. Well worth trying out.
Post Reply
nvd07
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:45 am
Country: France

Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by nvd07 » Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:03 pm

I have just read the important annoucement mid March in the er9x development thread - thank you very much Mike for your outstanding support and contribution to the RC community with er9x ! It does everything I want right now, so I will enjoy using it a few more years...

I see that the 4-in-1 Multi Protocol Module is moving ahead, and even though I am expecting some possible DSMX fixes in the new releases, I am also thinking that at some point, I will probably have to stop updating the firmware in my 4-in-1 MPM, so that it remains fully compatible with the er9x we have now...

Especially I noticed one of the recent MPM changes from early march mentioned this for the core part of the code :

' MULTI_STATUS is gone: erskyTX and er9x must be upgraded to the latest test versions. '

(
I took this from:
https://github.com/pascallanger/DIY-Mul ... /v1.3.2.58
)
this statement was in comparison to the previous release v1.3.2.30
I found that 'er9x... latest test version' was a bit unspecific and 'MULTI_STATUS' was something I have heard before and a possible concern, although I cannot remember what it was doing for us.

Right now my MPM is far behind : v1.3.1.58 from several months ago (self compiled in between two official releases) .

So the above change I quoted, is just one of the changes in the latest changelog of the MPM; but there has been others along the way.


So I guess more generally the question is :
==> Could I flash my MPM with the latest as of march 2021 : v1.3.2.61 and still be compatible with er9x ? or is there a 'max release number' for the MPM firmware, that all the er9x users should better stick with ?

thanks!


User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17430
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by MikeB » Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:43 am

If you use the "test" version er9xProv822w.zip, then you should be compatible the latest release of the MPM firmware.
er9x does support "Multi Telemetry".
What I think I need to do is an full release of version 822 as the "last" release of er9x.
No doubt "MULTI_STATUS" was removed to free up flash space in the MPM.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!

nvd07
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:45 am
Country: France

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by nvd07 » Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:51 pm

MikeB wrote:
Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:43 am
If you use the "test" version er9xProv822w.zip, then you should be compatible the latest release of the MPM firmware.
Ok thanks. I downloaded the code (latest release / v1.3.2.61) and compiled it and flashed it successfully onto my MPM today. From a quick look it works fine, talks to er9x and to the receiver, I will be using this release from now on.
MikeB wrote:
Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:43 am
er9x does support "Multi Telemetry".
Ok from this and from looking into it again I now understand altough "MULTI_STATUS" was removed recently , it was not being used anymore for quite some time / in short my compatibilty concerns were not justified.
MikeB wrote:
Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:43 am
No doubt "MULTI_STATUS" was removed to free up flash space in the MPM.

Mike
Absolutely - this time and for the first time I could not compile the full list of protocols: they no longer all fit into my STM 32, I had to take out a few of them!

Thanks.

User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17430
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by MikeB » Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:33 am

I've just updated from Github to 1.3.2.67, compiled using 1.8.13 Arduino IDE (compiler is 4.8.3), and I get a size of 118196 out of 120808, with all protocols included. I'm using "USB Support Disabled" and "Debug Option None".

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!

nvd07
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:45 am
Country: France

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by nvd07 » Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:27 pm

MikeB wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:33 am
... I'm using "USB Support Disabled" ...

Mike
OK thanks - this is where the difference is ; mine is still enabled as I had not paid attention to these topics, and it makes the full build overflow by about 3K. I just read from a september-ish 2020 discussion that this change was a way to save about 5k.

I will first need to upgrade to the newer bootloader though, to make sure my MPM will accept these "USB Support Disabled" builds .


User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17430
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by MikeB » Thu Apr 01, 2021 3:47 pm

I thought the "USB Disabled" applied to the MPM firmware only, and removed the USB debug code. The bootloader, I thought, doesn't affect that. I'm sure I haven't changed my bootloaders for a long time (many months).

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!

User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 10870
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by Kilrah » Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:23 pm

It does require a change in the bootloader (very prominent in the doc/flash-multi) on the modules with native USB because when the USB code was in the main firmware it was used to flip back to bootloader on a flashing attempt. That's no more possible without it so the bootloader behavior was changed to stay in bootloader when USB is connected.

nvd07
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:45 am
Country: France

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by nvd07 » Thu Apr 01, 2021 5:11 pm

Yes this is real ,
and well this looks complicated to me at least,
- I decided to give it a go without changing the bootloader , as STM32 is reputedly hard to brick -

First in arduino IDE I got an update notification that the 4-in-1 board definition was lagging (1.1.8 vs 1.2.2), so I updated it. It turns out it introduced the menu "USB Enabled / Disabled" that I could not find in 1.1.8 (so the only obvious option for space saving in 1.1.8, was for me to disable some unused protocols).
I can now compile with all protocols but with USB disabled (120260bytes whereas Mike you have 118196. all else looks equal).

I uploaded successfuly 1.3.2.67 through the USB cable and without doing anything to my existing bootloader. It reports 1.3.2.67 fine in er9x... but...

Then I started to do things correctly : the telltale for the bootloader version, is the led blink rate :
https://github.com/benlye/flash-multi/b ... module-has

So it turns out I have the old one . ( outdated flash multi too: 0.4.1 )

So I tried flashing again from 1.3.2.67 to 1.3.2.61 and it is no longer possible. So with my adventurous attempt with the old bootloader , I could upgrade only once...

It shows that I need the updated flashmulti on my PC and the new bootloader on my MPM... :D
https://github.com/benlye/flash-multi/b ... d#solution

but people flashing the MPM through the Tx, would not need all this, as far as I understand... but I have been wrong sometimes :lol:

User avatar
jhsa
Posts: 19426
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:13 pm
Country: Germany

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by jhsa » Fri Apr 02, 2021 2:48 pm

Could it be that the changes made to the bootloader (obviously without Mike knowing about it) broke the capability of the MPM being able to be updated by the ErskyTX firmware.. This concerns me because I have a radio with an MPM built in it, and it would be a pain to even flash a new bootloader to it without dismantling half of the radio :(

João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9

Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW

nvd07
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:45 am
Country: France

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by nvd07 » Fri Apr 02, 2021 7:13 pm

jhsa wrote:
Fri Apr 02, 2021 2:48 pm
...broke the capability of the MPM being able to be updated by the ErskyTX firmware...
I do not totally master these topics however my guess would be that for your case, you still have the option to build the MPM firmware yourself on your PC, with the options still set to be compatible with the old bootloader (which is what I was doing succesfully at the start of the week, before I finally moved both to the new board definition, and to the new flashmulti ). This image would then be flashable by your usual means to your existing MPMs still having the old bootloader...

User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 10870
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by Kilrah » Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:37 pm

No, it only changes the ability to flash from the USB port on modules with native USB (as opposed to an USB-serial converter on the board).

User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17430
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by MikeB » Sat Apr 03, 2021 10:26 am

Update from the radio should continue to work.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!

User avatar
jhsa
Posts: 19426
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:13 pm
Country: Germany

Re: Q: er9x compatibility with 2021 FW for 4-in-1 MPM (v1.3.2.58 or .61)

Post by jhsa » Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:12 pm

Ok, good, thanks.. Obviously I haven't been following all this since a while :)

João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9

Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW


Post Reply

Return to “er9x”