Skip to content

bitbo03/system: implement communication_timeout_reset#1888

Draft
benma wants to merge 1 commit intoBitBoxSwiss:masterfrom
benma:comms_timeout
Draft

bitbo03/system: implement communication_timeout_reset#1888
benma wants to merge 1 commit intoBitBoxSwiss:masterfrom
benma:comms_timeout

Conversation

@benma
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@benma benma commented Apr 1, 2026

Tested by inserting this into workflow/pairing.rs at top of the confirm function:

extern crate std;
hal.system().communication_timeout_reset(-70);
std::thread::sleep(core::time::Duration::from_secs(5));

Without the reset, the sleep will destroy the workflow because of the timeout. WIth the reset, it proceeds successfully.

@benma benma requested a review from NickeZ April 1, 2026 13:30
@NickeZ
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

NickeZ commented Apr 1, 2026

Can we wait with this until it is necessary? In the bb02 this is necessary because the main loop is blocked for some operations, right? I hope that won't be the case for bb03 if we don't paint ourselves into that corner again.

@benma
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

benma commented Apr 1, 2026

Can we wait with this until it is necessary? In the bb02 this is necessary because the main loop is blocked for some operations, right? I hope that won't be the case for bb03 if we don't paint ourselves into that corner again.

Don't think it can wait. The slow operations will be in BB03 too, which I think solely come from securechip operations, which are not async yet. I'd rather have this for a little longer and not work on making securechip ops async for now.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@NickeZ NickeZ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAK, my experience so far with the STM SDK is that we cannot block the main loop.

@benma
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

benma commented Apr 1, 2026

NAK, my experience so far with the STM SDK is that we cannot block the main loop.

Okay, then it will be a no-op #1890.

Will leave this in draft mode in case we can find a STM workaround to avoid reworking the securechip ops to be async.

@benma benma marked this pull request as draft April 1, 2026 14:08
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants