Skip to content

feat(mt12): make use of "servo test" port - #6528

Merged
pfeerick merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
3djc/MT12-servo
Aug 18, 2026
Merged

pfeerick merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
3djc/MT12-servo

Conversation

@raphaelcoeffic

@raphaelcoeffic raphaelcoeffic commented Aug 18, 2025 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Follow-up of #6527 as a "Tool" (similar to spectrum analyser).

image image

@pfeerick

pfeerick commented Aug 19, 2025 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Is there scope / room for this to be added as an actual output in the future (not necessarily in this PR!), thus allowing for model specific use of the port? This is how I thought it was supposed to implemented right from day one - i.e. be able to in a model configure mixer to control the PPM port. Which to be honest is why I don't like either implementation (if it is to be the only one)... while this is the better one, as it really shouldn't have been "hidden" on the hardware page as one use case is more of a tool - the other being to provide an easily pluggable PPM port for accessories/modules.

@3djc

3djc commented Aug 19, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

That was the intention of my original design. This tool approach doesn't allow you to use it to plug say your steering servo and adjust outputs, since you would have to back out of tools, the outpiut would stop, change output settings, back into tools, not quite right yet, out of .. you get the idea.This tool approach really severly limits the use of it

The way it was initially proposed and refused did allow you to choose a channel you don't use for RF output, and then you can use it differently per model using the mixer.

@raphaelcoeffic

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Maybe I am/was just missing the imagination for the actual use-case. I was thinking about a simple servo tester. You guys seem to have something much broader in mind, right?

That being said, I'm still not convinced we need a persistent setting here. The tool could however be made to keep the PWM output "open" when leaving the screen. Would that make it more useful? (while still keeping it dead simple)

@3djc

3djc commented Aug 19, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I think persistancy is required for some (yes, more exotic) usage. I have no preferences between radio or model setting

@raphaelcoeffic

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

provide an easily pluggable PPM port for accessories/modules

Any idea what that could be? What kind of accessories/modules?

@pfeerick

pfeerick commented Aug 19, 2025 via email •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@raphaelcoeffic

raphaelcoeffic commented Aug 20, 2025 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Ok, so just leaving the output working when leaving the tool would be sufficient for now? That would at least cover the "servo tester" use case without having to stay on that screen, right?

I'd need to find a non-invasive way to keep updating the output. ATM, this is done during screen refresh, which dead simple and does not require anything outside this one tool file.

@pfeerick

pfeerick commented Aug 20, 2025 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Probably for the present time, I'd just leave it as it is... as a tool, as I said before, I don't see it making sense it being persistent/active once you leave the screen, unless there is a specific setting to turn it on (and conversely off) persistently without going to the tool page. i.e. no different to the spectrum analyser. And wait for feedback to see if anyone actually wants more. This more of a "have you thought about if it gets extended this way" prompt ;) Note that I haven't even started on the where are the end points, update rate, manual/centre/sweep, etc options as I get that those will come later ;)

Hm... the "PWM output" line should probably be "Source" ... you're configuring the source for the PWM output, not where it's going ;)

@pfeerick pfeerick added this to the 3.0 milestone Aug 20, 2025
@pfeerick pfeerick added the needs: rebase A git rebase on top of the latest destination branch version is required label Oct 14, 2025
@pfeerick pfeerick removed the needs: rebase A git rebase on top of the latest destination branch version is required label Jan 25, 2026
@pfeerick pfeerick changed the title feat: MT12 servo pulse feat(mt12): make use of "servo test" port Jan 25, 2026
@pfeerick
pfeerick marked this pull request as ready for review January 25, 2026 09:44

@pfeerick pfeerick left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@raphaelcoeffic When I just tried this out again, I realised the text I changed from "PWM output" to "Source" is actually the values from mixes/outputs? And is using the names from Inputs instead of either mixes/outputs?

To put this into context, I was testing with a MPM car model that has

Input

1 TH
2 ST

and

Mixes

CH1 - N/A
CH2 - N/A
CH3 - TH (Input 1)
CH4 - ST (Input 2)

I shouldn't really be seeing I04 when I (correctly) scroll to what would be mix/output 4, no? I would have expected CH4 (since we're limiting this to MAX_OUTPUT_CHANNELS) or perhaps 'I'S (because I lazily named the input S). Might wanna fix that? And I guess the text would then just be the string for output? Or is "Source" the best fit here still?

@raphaelcoeffic raphaelcoeffic self-assigned this Jan 26, 2026
@pfeerick

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Just a reminder you self-assigned this ;) Unless you want me to have another poke at it

3djc and others added 3 commits August 18, 2026 16:09
pfeerick: fix rebase sim string ommit
pwmOutputSource was stored as a raw mixsrc_t incremented from
MIXSRC_NONE, which lands in the inputs range (1..MAX_INPUTS) of the
MixSources enum rather than the outputs range (MIXSRC_FIRST_CH..
MIXSRC_LAST_CH). This made drawSource() render an input name (I04)
instead of a channel name (CH4), and wired the pulse to the wrong
physical channel. Treat pwmOutputSource as a plain 1-based channel
index and map it to MIXSRC_FIRST_CH only when drawing.
@pfeerick
pfeerick dismissed their stale review August 18, 2026 06:24

rebased and corrections needed made

@pfeerick
pfeerick merged commit 423876b into main Aug 18, 2026
48 checks passed
@pfeerick
pfeerick deleted the 3djc/MT12-servo branch August 18, 2026 23:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants