subsurface/core/dive.cpp

3319 lines
92 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/* dive.cpp */
/* maintains the internal dive list structure */
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <memory>
#include "dive.h"
#include "gettext.h"
#include "subsurface-string.h"
#include "libdivecomputer.h"
#include "device.h"
#include "divelist.h"
#include "divelog.h"
#include "divesite.h"
#include "errorhelper.h"
#include "event.h"
#include "extradata.h"
#include "interpolate.h"
#include "qthelper.h"
#include "membuffer.h"
#include "picture.h"
#include "range.h"
#include "sample.h"
#include "tag.h"
#include "trip.h"
#include "structured_list.h"
#include "fulltext.h"
// For user visible text but still not translated
const char *divemode_text_ui[] = {
QT_TRANSLATE_NOOP("gettextFromC", "Open circuit"),
QT_TRANSLATE_NOOP("gettextFromC", "CCR"),
QT_TRANSLATE_NOOP("gettextFromC", "pSCR"),
QT_TRANSLATE_NOOP("gettextFromC", "Freedive")
};
// For writing/reading files.
const char *divemode_text[] = {"OC", "CCR", "PSCR", "Freedive"};
static double calculate_depth_to_mbarf(int depth, pressure_t surface_pressure, int salinity);
dive::dive()
{
id = dive_getUniqID();
}
static void free_dive_structures(struct dive *d);
dive::~dive()
{
free_dive_structures(this);
}
dive::dive(dive &&) = default;
dive &dive::operator=(const dive &) = default;
/*
* The legacy format for sample pressures has a single pressure
* for each sample that can have any sensor, plus a possible
* "o2pressure" that is fixed to the Oxygen sensor for a CCR dive.
*
* For more complex pressure data, we have to use explicit
* cylinder indices for each sample.
*
* This function returns a negative number for "no legacy mode",
* or a non-negative number that indicates the o2 sensor index.
*/
int legacy_format_o2pressures(const struct dive *dive, const struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int o2sensor;
o2sensor = (dc->divemode == CCR) ? get_cylinder_idx_by_use(dive, OXYGEN) : -1;
for (const auto &s: dc->samples) {
int seen_pressure = 0, idx;
for (idx = 0; idx < MAX_SENSORS; idx++) {
int sensor = s.sensor[idx];
pressure_t p = s.pressure[idx];
if (!p.mbar)
continue;
if (sensor == o2sensor)
continue;
if (seen_pressure)
return -1;
seen_pressure = 1;
}
}
/*
* Use legacy mode: if we have no O2 sensor we return a
* positive sensor index that is guaranmteed to not match
* any sensor (we encode it as 8 bits).
*/
return o2sensor < 0 ? 256 : o2sensor;
}
/* warning: does not test idx for validity */
struct event create_gas_switch_event(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, int seconds, int idx)
{
/* The gas switch event format is insane for historical reasons */
struct gasmix mix = get_cylinder(dive, idx)->gasmix;
int o2 = get_o2(mix);
int he = get_he(mix);
o2 = (o2 + 5) / 10;
he = (he + 5) / 10;
int value = o2 + (he << 16);
struct event ev(seconds, he ? SAMPLE_EVENT_GASCHANGE2 : SAMPLE_EVENT_GASCHANGE, 0, value, "gaschange");
ev.gas.index = idx;
ev.gas.mix = mix;
return ev;
}
void add_gas_switch_event(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, int seconds, int idx)
{
/* sanity check so we don't crash */
/* FIXME: The planner uses a dummy cylinder one past the official number of cylinders
* in the table to mark no-cylinder surface interavals. This is horrendous. Fix ASAP. */
//if (idx < 0 || idx >= dive->cylinders.nr) {
if (idx < 0 || idx >= dive->cylinders.nr + 1 || idx >= dive->cylinders.allocated) {
report_error("Unknown cylinder index: %d", idx);
return;
}
struct event ev = create_gas_switch_event(dive, dc, seconds, idx);
add_event_to_dc(dc, std::move(ev));
}
struct gasmix get_gasmix_from_event(const struct dive *dive, const struct event &ev)
{
if (event_is_gaschange(ev)) {
int index = ev.gas.index;
// FIXME: The planner uses one past cylinder-count to signify "surface air". Remove in due course.
if (index == dive->cylinders.nr)
return gasmix_air;
if (index >= 0 && index < dive->cylinders.nr)
return get_cylinder(dive, index)->gasmix;
return ev.gas.mix;
Start using the actual cylinder data for gas switch events Now that gas switch events always have indices into the cylinder table, start using that to look up the gas mix from the cylinders rather than from the gas switch event itself. In other words, the cylinder index is now the primary data for gas switch events. This means that now as you change the cylinder information, the gas switch events will automatically update to reflect those changes. Note that on loading data from the outside (either from a xml file, from a git/cloud account, or from a dive computer), we may or may not initially have an index for the gas change event. The external data may be from an older version of subsurface, or it may be from a libdivecomputer download that just doesn't give index data at all. In that case, we will do: - if there is no index, but there is explicit gas mix information, we will look up the index based on that gas mix, picking the cylinder that has the closest mix. - if there isn't even explicit gas mix data, so we only have the event value from libdivecomputer, we will turn that value into a gasmix, and use that to look up the cylinder index as above. - if no valid cylinder information is available at all, gas switch events will just be dropped. When saving the data, we now always save the cylinder index, and the gas mix associated with that cylinder (that gas mix will be ignored on load, since the index is the primary, but it makes the event much easier to read). It is worth noting we do not modify the libdivecomputer value, even if the gasmix has changed, so that remains as a record of the original download. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-02 21:07:06 +00:00
}
return gasmix_air;
}
// we need this to be uniq. oh, and it has no meaning whatsoever
// - that's why we have the silly initial number and increment by 3 :-)
int dive_getUniqID()
{
static int maxId = 83529;
maxId += 3;
return maxId;
}
/* this is very different from the copy_dive_computer later in this file;
* this function actually makes full copies of the content */
static void copy_dc(const struct divecomputer *sdc, struct divecomputer *ddc)
{
*ddc = *sdc;
}
static void dc_cylinder_renumber(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, const int mapping[]);
/* copy dive computer list and renumber the cylinders
* space for the first divecomputer is provided by the
* caller, the remainder is allocated */
static void copy_dc_renumber(struct dive *d, const struct divecomputer *sdc, struct divecomputer *ddc, const int cylinders_map[])
{
for (;;) {
*ddc = *sdc;
dc_cylinder_renumber(d, ddc, cylinders_map);
if (!sdc->next)
break;
sdc = sdc->next;
ddc->next = new divecomputer;
ddc = ddc->next;
}
ddc->next = NULL;
}
static void free_dive_structures(struct dive *d)
{
if (!d)
return;
fulltext_unregister(d);
/* free the strings */
free(d->buddy);
free(d->diveguide);
free(d->notes);
free(d->suit);
/* free tags, additional dive computers, and pictures */
taglist_free(d->tag_list);
free_dive_dcs(&d->dc);
clear_cylinder_table(&d->cylinders);
free(d->cylinders.cylinders);
clear_weightsystem_table(&d->weightsystems);
free(d->weightsystems.weightsystems);
clear_picture_table(&d->pictures);
free(d->pictures.pictures);
}
/* copy_dive makes duplicates of many components of a dive;
* in order not to leak memory, we need to free those .
* copy_dive doesn't play with the divetrip and forward/backward pointers
* so we can ignore those */
void clear_dive(struct dive *d)
{
if (!d)
return;
free_dive_structures(d);
*d = dive();
}
/* make a true copy that is independent of the source dive;
* all data structures are duplicated, so the copy can be modified without
* any impact on the source */
static void copy_dive_nodc(const struct dive *s, struct dive *d)
{
clear_dive(d);
/* simply copy things over, but then make actual copies of the
* relevant components that are referenced through pointers,
* so all the strings and the structured lists */
*d = *s;
memset(&d->cylinders, 0, sizeof(d->cylinders));
memset(&d->weightsystems, 0, sizeof(d->weightsystems));
memset(&d->pictures, 0, sizeof(d->pictures));
d->full_text = NULL;
invalidate_dive_cache(d);
d->buddy = copy_string(s->buddy);
d->diveguide = copy_string(s->diveguide);
d->notes = copy_string(s->notes);
d->suit = copy_string(s->suit);
copy_cylinders(&s->cylinders, &d->cylinders);
copy_weights(&s->weightsystems, &d->weightsystems);
copy_pictures(&s->pictures, &d->pictures);
d->tag_list = taglist_copy(s->tag_list);
}
void copy_dive(const struct dive *s, struct dive *d)
{
copy_dive_nodc(s, d);
// Copy the first dc explicitly, then the list of subsequent dc's
d->dc = s->dc;
STRUCTURED_LIST_COPY(struct divecomputer, s->dc.next, d->dc.next, copy_dc);
}
static void copy_dive_onedc(const struct dive *s, const struct divecomputer *sdc, struct dive *d)
{
copy_dive_nodc(s, d);
d->dc = *sdc;
d->dc.next = NULL;
}
/* make a clone of the source dive and clean out the source dive;
* this allows us to create a dive on the stack and then
* add it to the divelist. */
struct std::unique_ptr<dive> move_dive(struct dive *s)
{
auto d = std::make_unique<dive>();
std::swap(*s, *d);
return d;
}
#define CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING(_component) \
if (what._component) \
d->_component = copy_string(s->_component)
// copy elements, depending on bits in what that are set
void selective_copy_dive(const struct dive *s, struct dive *d, struct dive_components what, bool clear)
{
if (clear)
clear_dive(d);
CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING(notes);
CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING(diveguide);
CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING(buddy);
CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING(suit);
if (what.rating)
d->rating = s->rating;
if (what.visibility)
d->visibility = s->visibility;
if (what.divesite) {
unregister_dive_from_dive_site(d);
s->dive_site->add_dive(d);
}
if (what.tags)
d->tag_list = taglist_copy(s->tag_list);
if (what.cylinders)
copy_cylinder_types(s, d);
if (what.weights)
copy_weights(&s->weightsystems, &d->weightsystems);
if (what.number)
d->number = s->number;
if (what.when)
d->when = s->when;
}
#undef CONDITIONAL_COPY_STRING
/* copies all events from the given dive computer before a given time
this is used when editing a dive in the planner to preserve the events
of the old dive */
void copy_events_until(const struct dive *sd, struct dive *dd, int dcNr, int time)
{
if (!sd || !dd)
return;
const struct divecomputer *s = &sd->dc;
struct divecomputer *d = get_dive_dc(dd, dcNr);
if (!s || !d)
return;
for (const auto &ev: s->events) {
// Don't add events the planner knows about
if (ev.time.seconds < time && !event_is_gaschange(ev) && !event_is_divemodechange(ev))
add_event(d, ev.time.seconds, ev.type, ev.flags, ev.value, ev.name);
}
}
int nr_cylinders(const struct dive *dive)
Initial implementation of git save format This saves the dive data into a git object repository instead of a single XML file. We create a git object tree with each dive as a separate file, hierarchically by trip and date. NOTE 1: This largely duplicates the XML saving code, because trying to share it seemed just too painful: the logic is very similar, but the details of the actual strings end up differing sufficiently that there are tons of trivial differences. The git save format is line-based with minimal quoting, while XML quotes everything with either "<..\>" or using single quotes around attributes. NOTE 2: You currently need a dummy "file" to save to, which points to the real save location: the git repository and branch to be used. We should make this a config thing, but for testing, do something like this: echo git /home/torvalds/scuba:linus > git-test to create that git information file, and when you use "Save To" and specify "git-test" as the file to save to, subsurface will use the new git save logic to save to the branch "linus" in the repository found at "/home/torvalds/scuba". NOTE 3: The git save format uses just the git object directory, it does *not* check out the result in any git working tree or index. So after you do a save, you can do git log -p linus to see what actually happened in that branch, but it will not affect any actual checked-out state in the repository. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-03-06 21:28:39 +00:00
{
return dive->cylinders.nr;
Initial implementation of git save format This saves the dive data into a git object repository instead of a single XML file. We create a git object tree with each dive as a separate file, hierarchically by trip and date. NOTE 1: This largely duplicates the XML saving code, because trying to share it seemed just too painful: the logic is very similar, but the details of the actual strings end up differing sufficiently that there are tons of trivial differences. The git save format is line-based with minimal quoting, while XML quotes everything with either "<..\>" or using single quotes around attributes. NOTE 2: You currently need a dummy "file" to save to, which points to the real save location: the git repository and branch to be used. We should make this a config thing, but for testing, do something like this: echo git /home/torvalds/scuba:linus > git-test to create that git information file, and when you use "Save To" and specify "git-test" as the file to save to, subsurface will use the new git save logic to save to the branch "linus" in the repository found at "/home/torvalds/scuba". NOTE 3: The git save format uses just the git object directory, it does *not* check out the result in any git working tree or index. So after you do a save, you can do git log -p linus to see what actually happened in that branch, but it will not affect any actual checked-out state in the repository. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-03-06 21:28:39 +00:00
}
int nr_weightsystems(const struct dive *dive)
Initial implementation of git save format This saves the dive data into a git object repository instead of a single XML file. We create a git object tree with each dive as a separate file, hierarchically by trip and date. NOTE 1: This largely duplicates the XML saving code, because trying to share it seemed just too painful: the logic is very similar, but the details of the actual strings end up differing sufficiently that there are tons of trivial differences. The git save format is line-based with minimal quoting, while XML quotes everything with either "<..\>" or using single quotes around attributes. NOTE 2: You currently need a dummy "file" to save to, which points to the real save location: the git repository and branch to be used. We should make this a config thing, but for testing, do something like this: echo git /home/torvalds/scuba:linus > git-test to create that git information file, and when you use "Save To" and specify "git-test" as the file to save to, subsurface will use the new git save logic to save to the branch "linus" in the repository found at "/home/torvalds/scuba". NOTE 3: The git save format uses just the git object directory, it does *not* check out the result in any git working tree or index. So after you do a save, you can do git log -p linus to see what actually happened in that branch, but it will not affect any actual checked-out state in the repository. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-03-06 21:28:39 +00:00
{
return dive->weightsystems.nr;
Initial implementation of git save format This saves the dive data into a git object repository instead of a single XML file. We create a git object tree with each dive as a separate file, hierarchically by trip and date. NOTE 1: This largely duplicates the XML saving code, because trying to share it seemed just too painful: the logic is very similar, but the details of the actual strings end up differing sufficiently that there are tons of trivial differences. The git save format is line-based with minimal quoting, while XML quotes everything with either "<..\>" or using single quotes around attributes. NOTE 2: You currently need a dummy "file" to save to, which points to the real save location: the git repository and branch to be used. We should make this a config thing, but for testing, do something like this: echo git /home/torvalds/scuba:linus > git-test to create that git information file, and when you use "Save To" and specify "git-test" as the file to save to, subsurface will use the new git save logic to save to the branch "linus" in the repository found at "/home/torvalds/scuba". NOTE 3: The git save format uses just the git object directory, it does *not* check out the result in any git working tree or index. So after you do a save, you can do git log -p linus to see what actually happened in that branch, but it will not affect any actual checked-out state in the repository. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-03-06 21:28:39 +00:00
}
void copy_used_cylinders(const struct dive *s, struct dive *d, bool used_only)
{
int i;
if (!s || !d)
return;
clear_cylinder_table(&d->cylinders);
for (i = 0; i < s->cylinders.nr; i++) {
if (!used_only || is_cylinder_used(s, i) || get_cylinder(s, i)->cylinder_use == NOT_USED)
add_cloned_cylinder(&d->cylinders, *get_cylinder(s, i));
}
}
/*
* So when we re-calculate maxdepth and meandepth, we will
* not override the old numbers if they are close to the
* new ones.
*
* Why? Because a dive computer may well actually track the
2017-03-06 12:27:39 +00:00
* max. depth and mean depth at finer granularity than the
* samples it stores. So it's possible that the max and mean
* have been reported more correctly originally.
*
2011-09-04 01:48:39 +00:00
* Only if the values calculated from the samples are clearly
* different do we override the normal depth values.
*
* This considers 1m to be "clearly different". That's
* a totally random number.
*/
static void update_depth(depth_t *depth, int new_depth)
{
if (new_depth) {
int old = depth->mm;
if (abs(old - new_depth) > 1000)
depth->mm = new_depth;
}
}
static void update_temperature(temperature_t *temperature, int new_temp)
{
if (new_temp) {
int old = temperature->mkelvin;
if (abs(old - new_temp) > 1000)
temperature->mkelvin = new_temp;
}
}
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
/* Which cylinders had gas used? */
#define SOME_GAS 5000
static bool cylinder_used(const cylinder_t *cyl)
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
{
int start_mbar, end_mbar;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
start_mbar = cyl->start.mbar ?: cyl->sample_start.mbar;
end_mbar = cyl->end.mbar ?: cyl->sample_end.mbar;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
// More than 5 bar used? This matches statistics.cpp
// heuristics
return start_mbar > end_mbar + SOME_GAS;
}
/* Get list of used cylinders. Returns the number of used cylinders. */
static int get_cylinder_used(const struct dive *dive, bool used[])
{
int i, num = 0;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
used[i] = cylinder_used(get_cylinder(dive, i));
if (used[i])
num++;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
}
return num;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
}
/* Are there any used cylinders which we do not know usage about? */
static bool has_unknown_used_cylinders(const struct dive *dive, const struct divecomputer *dc,
const bool used_cylinders[], int num)
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
{
int idx;
auto used_and_unknown = std::make_unique<bool[]>(dive->cylinders.nr);
std::copy(used_cylinders, used_cylinders + dive->cylinders.nr, used_and_unknown.get());
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
/* We know about using the O2 cylinder in a CCR dive */
if (dc->divemode == CCR) {
int o2_cyl = get_cylinder_idx_by_use(dive, OXYGEN);
if (o2_cyl >= 0 && used_and_unknown[o2_cyl]) {
used_and_unknown[o2_cyl] = false;
num--;
}
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
}
/* We know about the explicit first cylinder (or first) */
idx = explicit_first_cylinder(dive, dc);
if (idx >= 0 && used_and_unknown[idx]) {
used_and_unknown[idx] = false;
num--;
}
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
/* And we have possible switches to other gases */
event_loop loop("gaschange");
const struct event *ev;
while ((ev = loop.next(*dc)) != nullptr && num > 0) {
idx = get_cylinder_index(dive, *ev);
if (idx >= 0 && used_and_unknown[idx]) {
used_and_unknown[idx] = false;
num--;
}
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
}
return num > 0;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
}
void per_cylinder_mean_depth(const struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, int *mean, int *duration)
{
int i;
int32_t lasttime = 0;
int lastdepth = 0;
int idx = 0;
int num_used_cylinders;
if (dive->cylinders.nr <= 0)
return;
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++)
mean[i] = duration[i] = 0;
if (!dc)
return;
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
/*
* There is no point in doing per-cylinder information
* if we don't actually know about the usage of all the
* used cylinders.
*/
auto used_cylinders = std::make_unique<bool[]>(dive->cylinders.nr);
num_used_cylinders = get_cylinder_used(dive, used_cylinders.get());
if (has_unknown_used_cylinders(dive, dc, used_cylinders.get(), num_used_cylinders)) {
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
/*
* If we had more than one used cylinder, but
* do not know usage of them, we simply cannot
* account mean depth to them.
*/
if (num_used_cylinders > 1)
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
return;
/*
* For a single cylinder, use the overall mean
* and duration
*/
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
if (used_cylinders[i]) {
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
mean[i] = dc->meandepth.mm;
duration[i] = dc->duration.seconds;
}
}
Fix per-cylinder SAC rate calculations when cylinder use isn't known John Van Ostrand reports that when he dives using two cylinders using sidemounts, the per-cylinder SAC rate display is very misleading. What happens is that since the two cylinders are used together (but without a manifold), John is alternating between the two but not actually adding gas switches in the profile. As a result, the profile looks like only one cylinder is used, even though clearly the other cylinder gets breathed down too. The per-cylinder SAC rate calculations would entirely ignore the cylinder that didn't have gas switch events to it, and looking at the info window it would look like John had a truly exceptional SAC rate. But then in the general statistics panel that actually takes the whole gas use into account, the very different real SAC rate would show up. The basic issue is that if we don't have full use information for the different cylinders, we would account the whole dive to just a partial set. We did have a special case for this, but that special case only really worked if the first cylinder truly was the only cylinder used. This patch makes us see the difference between "only one cylinder was used, and I can use the overall mean depth for it" and "more than one cylinder was used, but I don't know what the mean depths might be". Reported-by: John Van Ostrand <john@vanostrand.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-05 22:53:02 +00:00
return;
}
if (dc->samples.empty())
fake_dc(dc);
event_loop loop("gaschange");
const struct event *ev = loop.next(*dc);
std::vector<int> depthtime(dive->cylinders.nr, 0);
for (auto it = dc->samples.begin(); it != dc->samples.end(); ++it) {
int32_t time = it->time.seconds;
int depth = it->depth.mm;
/* Make sure to move the event past 'lasttime' */
while (ev && lasttime >= ev->time.seconds) {
idx = get_cylinder_index(dive, *ev);
ev = loop.next(*dc);
}
/* Do we need to fake a midway sample at an event? */
if (ev && it != dc->samples.begin() && time > ev->time.seconds) {
int newtime = ev->time.seconds;
int newdepth = interpolate(lastdepth, depth, newtime - lasttime, time - lasttime);
time = newtime;
depth = newdepth;
--it;
}
/* We ignore segments at the surface */
if (depth > SURFACE_THRESHOLD || lastdepth > SURFACE_THRESHOLD) {
duration[idx] += time - lasttime;
depthtime[idx] += (time - lasttime) * (depth + lastdepth) / 2;
}
lastdepth = depth;
lasttime = time;
}
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
if (duration[i])
mean[i] = (depthtime[i] + duration[i] / 2) / duration[i];
}
}
static void update_min_max_temperatures(struct dive *dive, temperature_t temperature)
{
if (temperature.mkelvin) {
if (!dive->maxtemp.mkelvin || temperature.mkelvin > dive->maxtemp.mkelvin)
dive->maxtemp = temperature;
if (!dive->mintemp.mkelvin || temperature.mkelvin < dive->mintemp.mkelvin)
dive->mintemp = temperature;
}
}
/*
* If the cylinder tank pressures are within half a bar
* (about 8 PSI) of the sample pressures, we consider it
* to be a rounding error, and throw them away as redundant.
*/
static int same_rounded_pressure(pressure_t a, pressure_t b)
{
return abs(a.mbar - b.mbar) <= 500;
}
/* Some dive computers (Cobalt) don't start the dive with cylinder 0 but explicitly
* tell us what the first gas is with a gas change event in the first sample.
* Sneakily we'll use a return value of 0 (or FALSE) when there is no explicit
* first cylinder - in which case cylinder 0 is indeed the first cylinder.
* We likewise return 0 if the event concerns a cylinder that doesn't exist.
* If the dive has no cylinders, -1 is returned. */
int explicit_first_cylinder(const struct dive *dive, const struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int res = 0;
if (!dive->cylinders.nr)
return -1;
if (dc) {
const struct event *ev = get_first_event(*dc, "gaschange");
if (ev && ((!dc->samples.empty() && ev->time.seconds == dc->samples[0].time.seconds) || ev->time.seconds <= 1))
res = get_cylinder_index(dive, *ev);
else if (dc->divemode == CCR)
res = std::max(get_cylinder_idx_by_use(dive, DILUENT), res);
}
return res < dive->cylinders.nr ? res : 0;
}
/* this gets called when the dive mode has changed (so OC vs. CC)
* there are two places we might have setpoints... events or in the samples
*/
void update_setpoint_events(const struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int new_setpoint = 0;
if (dc->divemode == CCR)
new_setpoint = prefs.defaultsetpoint;
if (dc->divemode == OC &&
(dc->model == "Shearwater Predator" ||
dc->model == "Shearwater Petrel" ||
dc->model == "Shearwater Nerd")) {
// make sure there's no setpoint in the samples
// this is an irreversible change - so switching a dive to OC
// by mistake when it's actually CCR is _bad_
// So we make sure, this comes from a Predator or Petrel and we only remove
// pO2 values we would have computed anyway.
event_loop loop("gaschange");
const struct event *ev = loop.next(*dc);
struct gasmix gasmix = get_gasmix_from_event(dive, *ev);
const struct event *next = loop.next(*dc);
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
if (next && sample.time.seconds >= next->time.seconds) {
ev = next;
gasmix = get_gasmix_from_event(dive, *ev);
next = loop.next(*dc);
}
gas_pressures pressures = fill_pressures(lrint(calculate_depth_to_mbarf(sample.depth.mm, dc->surface_pressure, 0)), gasmix ,0, dc->divemode);
if (abs(sample.setpoint.mbar - (int)(1000 * pressures.o2)) <= 50)
sample.setpoint.mbar = 0;
}
}
// an "SP change" event at t=0 is currently our marker for OC vs CCR
// this will need to change to a saner setup, but for now we can just
// check if such an event is there and adjust it, or add that event
struct event *ev = get_first_event(*dc, "SP change");
if (ev && ev->time.seconds == 0) {
ev->value = new_setpoint;
} else {
if (!add_event(dc, 0, SAMPLE_EVENT_PO2, 0, new_setpoint, "SP change"))
report_info("Could not add setpoint change event");
}
}
/*
* See if the size/workingpressure looks like some standard cylinder
* size, eg "AL80".
*
* NOTE! We don't take compressibility into account when naming
* cylinders. That makes a certain amount of sense, since the
* cylinder name is independent from the gasmix, and different
* gasmixes have different compressibility.
*/
static void match_standard_cylinder(cylinder_type_t *type)
{
double cuft, bar;
int psi, len;
const char *fmt;
char buffer[40], *p;
/* Do we already have a cylinder description? */
if (type->description)
return;
bar = type->workingpressure.mbar / 1000.0;
cuft = ml_to_cuft(type->size.mliter);
cuft *= bar_to_atm(bar);
psi = lrint(to_PSI(type->workingpressure));
switch (psi) {
case 2300 ... 2500: /* 2400 psi: LP tank */
fmt = "LP%d";
break;
case 2600 ... 2700: /* 2640 psi: LP+10% */
fmt = "LP%d";
break;
case 2900 ... 3100: /* 3000 psi: ALx tank */
fmt = "AL%d";
break;
case 3400 ... 3500: /* 3442 psi: HP tank */
fmt = "HP%d";
break;
case 3700 ... 3850: /* HP+10% */
fmt = "HP%d+";
break;
default:
return;
}
len = snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), fmt, (int)lrint(cuft));
p = (char *)malloc(len + 1);
if (!p)
return;
memcpy(p, buffer, len + 1);
type->description = p;
}
/*
* There are two ways to give cylinder size information:
* - total amount of gas in cuft (depends on working pressure and physical size)
* - physical size
*
* where "physical size" is the one that actually matters and is sane.
*
* We internally use physical size only. But we save the workingpressure
* so that we can do the conversion if required.
*/
static void sanitize_cylinder_type(cylinder_type_t *type)
{
/* If we have no working pressure, it had *better* be just a physical size! */
if (!type->workingpressure.mbar)
return;
/* No size either? Nothing to go on */
if (!type->size.mliter)
return;
/* Ok, we have both size and pressure: try to match a description */
match_standard_cylinder(type);
}
static void sanitize_cylinder_info(struct dive *dive)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
sanitize_gasmix(&get_cylinder(dive, i)->gasmix);
sanitize_cylinder_type(&get_cylinder(dive, i)->type);
}
}
/* some events should never be thrown away */
static bool is_potentially_redundant(const struct event &event)
{
if (event.name == "gaschange")
return false;
if (event.name == "bookmark")
return false;
if (event.name == "heading")
return false;
return true;
}
pressure_t calculate_surface_pressure(const struct dive *dive)
{
const struct divecomputer *dc;
pressure_t res;
int sum = 0, nr = 0;
for_each_relevant_dc(dive, dc) {
if (dc->surface_pressure.mbar) {
sum += dc->surface_pressure.mbar;
nr++;
}
}
res.mbar = nr ? (sum + nr / 2) / nr : 0;
return res;
}
static void fixup_surface_pressure(struct dive *dive)
{
dive->surface_pressure = calculate_surface_pressure(dive);
}
/* if the surface pressure in the dive data is redundant to the calculated
* value (i.e., it was added by running fixup on the dive) return 0,
* otherwise return the surface pressure given in the dive */
pressure_t un_fixup_surface_pressure(const struct dive *d)
{
pressure_t res = d->surface_pressure;
if (res.mbar && res.mbar == calculate_surface_pressure(d).mbar)
res.mbar = 0;
return res;
}
static void fixup_water_salinity(struct dive *dive)
{
struct divecomputer *dc;
int sum = 0, nr = 0;
for_each_relevant_dc (dive, dc) {
if (dc->salinity) {
if (dc->salinity < 500)
dc->salinity += FRESHWATER_SALINITY;
sum += dc->salinity;
nr++;
}
}
if (nr)
dive->salinity = (sum + nr / 2) / nr;
}
int get_dive_salinity(const struct dive *dive)
{
return dive->user_salinity ? dive->user_salinity : dive->salinity;
}
static void fixup_meandepth(struct dive *dive)
{
struct divecomputer *dc;
int sum = 0, nr = 0;
for_each_relevant_dc (dive, dc) {
if (dc->meandepth.mm) {
sum += dc->meandepth.mm;
nr++;
}
}
if (nr)
dive->meandepth.mm = (sum + nr / 2) / nr;
}
static void fixup_duration(struct dive *dive)
{
struct divecomputer *dc;
duration_t duration = { };
for_each_relevant_dc (dive, dc) {
duration.seconds = std::max(duration.seconds, dc->duration.seconds);
}
dive->duration.seconds = duration.seconds;
}
static void fixup_watertemp(struct dive *dive)
{
if (!dive->watertemp.mkelvin)
dive->watertemp.mkelvin = dc_watertemp(&dive->dc);
}
static void fixup_airtemp(struct dive *dive)
{
if (!dive->airtemp.mkelvin)
dive->airtemp.mkelvin = dc_airtemp(&dive->dc);
}
/* if the air temperature in the dive data is redundant to the one in its
* first divecomputer (i.e., it was added by running fixup on the dive)
* return 0, otherwise return the air temperature given in the dive */
static temperature_t un_fixup_airtemp(const struct dive *a)
{
temperature_t res = a->airtemp;
if (a->airtemp.mkelvin && a->airtemp.mkelvin == dc_airtemp(&a->dc))
res.mkelvin = 0;
return res;
}
/*
* events are stored as a linked list, so the concept of
* "consecutive, identical events" is somewhat hard to
* implement correctly (especially given that on some dive
* computers events are asynchronous, so they can come in
* between what would be the non-constant sample rate).
*
* So what we do is that we throw away clearly redundant
* events that are fewer than 61 seconds apart (assuming there
* is no dive computer with a sample rate of more than 60
* seconds... that would be pretty pointless to plot the
* profile with)
*/
static void fixup_dc_events(struct divecomputer *dc)
{
std::vector<int> to_delete;
for (auto [idx, event]: enumerated_range(dc->events)) {
if (!is_potentially_redundant(event))
continue;
for (int idx2 = idx - 1; idx2 > 0; --idx2) {
const auto &prev = dc->events[idx2];
if (prev.name == event.name && prev.flags == event.flags &&
event.time.seconds - prev.time.seconds < 61)
to_delete.push_back(idx);
}
}
// Delete from back to not invalidate indexes
for (auto it = to_delete.rbegin(); it != to_delete.rend(); ++it)
dc->events.erase(dc->events.begin() + *it);
}
static int interpolate_depth(struct divecomputer *dc, int idx, int lastdepth, int lasttime, int now)
{
int nextdepth = lastdepth;
int nexttime = now;
for (auto it = dc->samples.begin() + idx; it != dc->samples.end(); ++it) {
if (it->depth.mm < 0)
continue;
nextdepth = it->depth.mm;
nexttime = it->time.seconds;
break;
}
return interpolate(lastdepth, nextdepth, now-lasttime, nexttime-lasttime);
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
static void fixup_dc_depths(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int maxdepth = dc->maxdepth.mm;
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
int lasttime = 0, lastdepth = 0;
for (const auto [idx, sample]: enumerated_range(dc->samples)) {
int time = sample.time.seconds;
int depth = sample.depth.mm;
if (depth < 0 && idx + 2 < static_cast<int>(dc->samples.size())) {
depth = interpolate_depth(dc, idx, lastdepth, lasttime, time);
sample.depth.mm = depth;
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
if (depth > SURFACE_THRESHOLD) {
if (depth > maxdepth)
maxdepth = depth;
}
lastdepth = depth;
lasttime = time;
if (sample.cns > dive->maxcns)
dive->maxcns = sample.cns;
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
update_depth(&dc->maxdepth, maxdepth);
if (!is_logged(dive) || !is_dc_planner(dc))
if (maxdepth > dive->maxdepth.mm)
dive->maxdepth.mm = maxdepth;
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
static void fixup_dc_ndl(struct divecomputer *dc)
{
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
if (sample.ndl.seconds != 0)
break;
if (sample.ndl.seconds == 0)
sample.ndl.seconds = -1;
}
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
static void fixup_dc_temp(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int mintemp = 0, lasttemp = 0;
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
int temp = sample.temperature.mkelvin;
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
if (temp) {
/*
* If we have consecutive identical
* temperature readings, throw away
* the redundant ones.
*/
if (lasttemp == temp)
sample.temperature.mkelvin = 0;
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
else
lasttemp = temp;
if (!mintemp || temp < mintemp)
mintemp = temp;
}
update_min_max_temperatures(dive, sample.temperature);
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
update_temperature(&dc->watertemp, mintemp);
update_min_max_temperatures(dive, dc->watertemp);
}
/* Remove redundant pressure information */
static void simplify_dc_pressures(struct divecomputer *dc)
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
{
Start cleaning up sensor indexing for multiple sensors This is a very timid start at making us actually use multiple sensors without the magical special case for just CCR oxygen tracking. It mainly does: - turn the "sample->sensor" index into an array of two indexes, to match the pressures themselves. - get rid of dive->{oxygen_cylinder_index,diluent_cylinder_index}, since a CCR dive should now simply set the sample->sensor[] indices correctly instead. - in a couple of places, start actually looping over the sensors rather than special-case the O2 case (although often the small "loops" are just unrolled, since it's just two cases. but in many cases we still end up only covering the zero sensor case, because the CCR O2 sensor code coverage was fairly limited. It's entirely possible (even likely) that this migth break some existing case: it tries to be a fairly direct ("stupid") translation of the old code, but unlike the preparatory patch this does actually does change some semantics. For example, right now the git loader code assumes that if the git save data contains a o2pressure entry, it just hardcodes the O2 sensor index to 1. In fact, one issue is going to simply be that our file formats do not have that multiple sensor format, but instead had very clearly encoded things as being the CCR O2 pressure sensor. But this is hopefully close to usable, and I will need feedback (and maybe test cases) from people who have existing CCR dives with pressure data. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2017-07-21 02:49:45 +00:00
int lastindex[2] = { -1, -1 };
int lastpressure[2] = { 0 };
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
Start cleaning up sensor indexing for multiple sensors This is a very timid start at making us actually use multiple sensors without the magical special case for just CCR oxygen tracking. It mainly does: - turn the "sample->sensor" index into an array of two indexes, to match the pressures themselves. - get rid of dive->{oxygen_cylinder_index,diluent_cylinder_index}, since a CCR dive should now simply set the sample->sensor[] indices correctly instead. - in a couple of places, start actually looping over the sensors rather than special-case the O2 case (although often the small "loops" are just unrolled, since it's just two cases. but in many cases we still end up only covering the zero sensor case, because the CCR O2 sensor code coverage was fairly limited. It's entirely possible (even likely) that this migth break some existing case: it tries to be a fairly direct ("stupid") translation of the old code, but unlike the preparatory patch this does actually does change some semantics. For example, right now the git loader code assumes that if the git save data contains a o2pressure entry, it just hardcodes the O2 sensor index to 1. In fact, one issue is going to simply be that our file formats do not have that multiple sensor format, but instead had very clearly encoded things as being the CCR O2 pressure sensor. But this is hopefully close to usable, and I will need feedback (and maybe test cases) from people who have existing CCR dives with pressure data. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2017-07-21 02:49:45 +00:00
int j;
for (j = 0; j < MAX_SENSORS; j++) {
int pressure = sample.pressure[j].mbar;
int index = sample.sensor[j];
Start cleaning up sensor indexing for multiple sensors This is a very timid start at making us actually use multiple sensors without the magical special case for just CCR oxygen tracking. It mainly does: - turn the "sample->sensor" index into an array of two indexes, to match the pressures themselves. - get rid of dive->{oxygen_cylinder_index,diluent_cylinder_index}, since a CCR dive should now simply set the sample->sensor[] indices correctly instead. - in a couple of places, start actually looping over the sensors rather than special-case the O2 case (although often the small "loops" are just unrolled, since it's just two cases. but in many cases we still end up only covering the zero sensor case, because the CCR O2 sensor code coverage was fairly limited. It's entirely possible (even likely) that this migth break some existing case: it tries to be a fairly direct ("stupid") translation of the old code, but unlike the preparatory patch this does actually does change some semantics. For example, right now the git loader code assumes that if the git save data contains a o2pressure entry, it just hardcodes the O2 sensor index to 1. In fact, one issue is going to simply be that our file formats do not have that multiple sensor format, but instead had very clearly encoded things as being the CCR O2 pressure sensor. But this is hopefully close to usable, and I will need feedback (and maybe test cases) from people who have existing CCR dives with pressure data. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2017-07-21 02:49:45 +00:00
if (index == lastindex[j]) {
/* Remove duplicate redundant pressure information */
if (pressure == lastpressure[j])
sample.pressure[j].mbar = 0;
Start cleaning up sensor indexing for multiple sensors This is a very timid start at making us actually use multiple sensors without the magical special case for just CCR oxygen tracking. It mainly does: - turn the "sample->sensor" index into an array of two indexes, to match the pressures themselves. - get rid of dive->{oxygen_cylinder_index,diluent_cylinder_index}, since a CCR dive should now simply set the sample->sensor[] indices correctly instead. - in a couple of places, start actually looping over the sensors rather than special-case the O2 case (although often the small "loops" are just unrolled, since it's just two cases. but in many cases we still end up only covering the zero sensor case, because the CCR O2 sensor code coverage was fairly limited. It's entirely possible (even likely) that this migth break some existing case: it tries to be a fairly direct ("stupid") translation of the old code, but unlike the preparatory patch this does actually does change some semantics. For example, right now the git loader code assumes that if the git save data contains a o2pressure entry, it just hardcodes the O2 sensor index to 1. In fact, one issue is going to simply be that our file formats do not have that multiple sensor format, but instead had very clearly encoded things as being the CCR O2 pressure sensor. But this is hopefully close to usable, and I will need feedback (and maybe test cases) from people who have existing CCR dives with pressure data. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2017-07-21 02:49:45 +00:00
}
lastindex[j] = index;
lastpressure[j] = pressure;
}
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
/* Do we need a sensor -> cylinder mapping? */
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
static void fixup_start_pressure(struct dive *dive, int idx, pressure_t p)
{
if (idx >= 0 && idx < dive->cylinders.nr) {
cylinder_t *cyl = get_cylinder(dive, idx);
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
if (p.mbar && !cyl->sample_start.mbar)
cyl->sample_start = p;
}
}
static void fixup_end_pressure(struct dive *dive, int idx, pressure_t p)
{
if (idx >= 0 && idx < dive->cylinders.nr) {
cylinder_t *cyl = get_cylinder(dive, idx);
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
if (p.mbar && !cyl->sample_end.mbar)
cyl->sample_end = p;
}
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
/*
* Check the cylinder pressure sample information and fill in the
* overall cylinder pressures from those.
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
*
* We ignore surface samples for tank pressure information.
*
* At the beginning of the dive, let the cylinder cool down
* if the diver starts off at the surface. And at the end
* of the dive, there may be surface pressures where the
* diver has already turned off the air supply (especially
* for computers like the Uemis Zurich that end up saving
* quite a bit of samples after the dive has ended).
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
*/
static void fixup_dive_pressures(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
/* Walk the samples from the beginning to find starting pressures.. */
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
if (sample.depth.mm < SURFACE_THRESHOLD)
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
continue;
for (int idx = 0; idx < MAX_SENSORS; idx++)
fixup_start_pressure(dive, sample.sensor[idx], sample.pressure[idx]);
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
}
/* ..and from the end for ending pressures */
for (auto it = dc->samples.rbegin(); it != dc->samples.rend(); ++it) {
if (it->depth.mm < SURFACE_THRESHOLD)
Fix cylinder end pressure fixup from samples This bug admittedly hits almost nobody, but if you had multiple cylinder pressure sensors on the same cylinder (attached to multiple dive computers, of course), we would take the beginning pressure from the first dive computer, and the ending pressure from the last dive computer. That came about because we'd just walk all the dive computer samples in order, and the first time we see a relevant sample and we don't have a beginning pressure, we'd take that pressure. So the beginning pressure was from the first dive computer, and once we'd seen a valid beginning pressure, that would never change. But as we're walking along, we'd continue to update the ending pressure from the last relevant sample we see, which means that as we go on to look at the other dive computers, we'd continue to update the ending pressure with data from them. And mixing beginning/ending pressures from two different sensors just does not make sense. This changes the logic to be the same for beginning and ending pressures: we only update it once, with the first relevant sample we see. But we walk the samples twice: forwards from the beginning to find the first beginning pressure, and backwards from the end to find the ending pressure. That means that as we move on to the second dive computer, we've now filled in the ending pressure from the first one, and will no longer update it any more. NOTE! We don't stop scanning the samples (or the dive computers) just because we've found a valid pressure value. We'll always walk all the samples because there might be multiple different cylinders that get pressure data from different samples (and different dive computers). We could have some early-out logic when we've filled in all relevant cylinders, but since this just runs once per dive it's not worth it. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 20:23:55 +00:00
continue;
for (int idx = 0; idx < MAX_SENSORS; idx++)
fixup_end_pressure(dive, it->sensor[idx], it->pressure[idx]);
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
simplify_dc_pressures(dc);
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
}
/*
* Match a gas change event against the cylinders we have
*/
static bool validate_gaschange(struct dive *dive, struct event &event)
{
int index;
int o2, he, value;
/* We'll get rid of the per-event gasmix, but for now sanitize it */
if (gasmix_is_air(event.gas.mix))
event.gas.mix.o2.permille = 0;
/* Do we already have a cylinder index for this gasmix? */
if (event.gas.index >= 0)
return true;
index = find_best_gasmix_match(event.gas.mix, &dive->cylinders);
if (index < 0 || index >= dive->cylinders.nr)
return false;
/* Fix up the event to have the right information */
event.gas.index = index;
event.gas.mix = get_cylinder(dive, index)->gasmix;
/* Convert to odd libdivecomputer format */
o2 = get_o2(event.gas.mix);
he = get_he(event.gas.mix);
o2 = (o2 + 5) / 10;
he = (he + 5) / 10;
value = o2 + (he << 16);
event.value = value;
if (he)
event.type = SAMPLE_EVENT_GASCHANGE2;
return true;
}
/* Clean up event, return true if event is ok, false if it should be dropped as bogus */
static bool validate_event(struct dive *dive, struct event &event)
{
if (event_is_gaschange(event))
return validate_gaschange(dive, event);
return true;
}
static void fixup_dc_gasswitch(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
// erase-remove idiom
auto &events = dc->events;
events.erase(std::remove_if(events.begin(), events.end(),
[dive](auto &ev) { return !validate_event(dive, ev); }),
events.end());
}
static void fixup_no_o2sensors(struct divecomputer *dc)
{
// Its only relevant to look for sensor values on CCR and PSCR dives without any no_o2sensors recorded.
if (dc->no_o2sensors != 0 || !(dc->divemode == CCR || dc->divemode == PSCR))
return;
for (const auto &sample: dc->samples) {
int nsensor = 0;
// How many o2 sensors can we find in this sample?
for (int j = 0; j < MAX_O2_SENSORS; j++)
if (sample.o2sensor[j].mbar)
nsensor++;
// If we fond more than the previous found max, record it.
if (nsensor > dc->no_o2sensors)
dc->no_o2sensors = nsensor;
// Already found the maximum posible amount.
if (nsensor == MAX_O2_SENSORS)
return;
}
}
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
static void fixup_dc_sample_sensors(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
unsigned long sensor_mask = 0;
for (auto &sample: dc->samples) {
for (int j = 0; j < MAX_SENSORS; j++) {
int sensor = sample.sensor[j];
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
// No invalid sensor ID's, please
if (sensor < 0 || sensor > MAX_SENSORS) {
sample.sensor[j] = NO_SENSOR;
sample.pressure[j].mbar = 0;
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
continue;
}
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
// Don't bother tracking sensors with no data
if (!sample.pressure[j].mbar) {
sample.sensor[j] = NO_SENSOR;
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
continue;
}
// Remember the set of sensors we had
sensor_mask |= 1ul << sensor;
}
}
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
// Ignore the sensors we have cylinders for
sensor_mask >>= dive->cylinders.nr;
// Do we need to add empty cylinders?
while (sensor_mask) {
add_empty_cylinder(&dive->cylinders);
sensor_mask >>= 1;
}
}
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
static void fixup_dive_dc(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
/* Fixup duration and mean depth */
fixup_dc_duration(dc);
/* Fix up sample depth data */
fixup_dc_depths(dive, dc);
/* Fix up first sample ndl data */
fixup_dc_ndl(dc);
Split up fixup_dive_dc() into multiple smaller independent functions fixup_dive_dc() is called for each dive computer when we add a new dive. It does various housekeeping functions, cleaning up the sample data, and fixing up dive details as a result of the sample data. The function has grown to be a monster over time, and particularly the central "walk every sample" loop has become an unreadable mess. And the thing is, this isn't even all that performance-critical: it's only done once per dive and dc, and there is no reason to have a single illegible and complex loop. So split up that loop into several smaller pieces that each will loop individually over the sample data, and do just one thing. So now we have separate functions for - fixing up the depth samples with interpolation - fixing up dive temperature data - correcting the cylinder pressure sensor index - cleaning up the actual sample pressures Yes, this way we walk the samples multiple times, but the end result is that the code is much easier to understand. There should be no actual behavioral differences from this cleanup, except for the fact that since the code is much more understandable, this cleanup also fixed a bug: In the temperature fixup, we would fix up the overall dive temperatures based on the dive computer temperatures. But we would then fix up the overall dive computer temperature based on the sample temperature *afterwards*, which wouldn't then be reflected in the overall dive temperatures. There was another non-symptomatic bug that became obvious when doing this cleanup: the code used to calculate a 'depthtime' over the dive that was never actually used. That's a historical artifact of old code that had become dead when the average depth calculations were moved to a function of their own earlier. This is preparatory for fixing the overall cylinder pressure stats, which are currently wrong for dives with multiple dive computers: we currently take the starting cylinder pressure from the *first* dive computer that has cylinder pressure information, but we take the ending cylinder pressure from the *last* dive computer with cylinder pressure information. This does not fix that bug, but without this cleanup fixing that would be a nightmare due to the previous complicated "do everything in one single loop" model. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-04-01 19:32:56 +00:00
/* Fix up dive temperatures based on dive computer samples */
fixup_dc_temp(dive, dc);
/* Fix up gas switch events */
fixup_dc_gasswitch(dive, dc);
/* Fix up cylinder ids in pressure sensors */
Fix the dc sensor index fixup fixup_dc_sample_sensors() would make sure that any pressure sensor indexes were in range of the cylinders by just clearing the pressure data if the sensor index was larger than the number of cylinders in the dive. That certainly makes the sensor index data consistent, but at the cost of just dropping the sensor data entirely. Dirk had some cases of odd sensor data (probably because of an older version of subsurface, but possibly due to removing cylinders manually or because of oddities with the downloader for the Atomic Aquatics Cobalt dive computer he used), and when re-saving the dive, the pressure data would magically just get removed due to this. So rewrite the sensor data fixup to strive very hard to avoid throwing pressure sensor data away. The simplest way to do that is to just add the required number of cylinders, and then people can fix up their dives manually by remapping the sensor data. This whole "we clear the pressure data" was at least partly hidden by two things: (1) in the git save format, we don't rewrite dives unless you've changed the dive some way, so old dives stay around with old data in the save until explicitly changed. (2) if you had multiple dive computers, and one dive computer does not have any pressure data but another one does, our profile will use that "other" dive computer pressure data (because often times you might have only one dive computer that is air integrated, but you still want to see the tank pressure when you look at other dive computers - or you have one dive computer give pressure data for your deco bottle, and another for your travel gas etc). So those two facts hid the reality that we had actually cleared the tank sensor data for Dirk's dive with the Atomic Aquatics dive computer, because we'd still see pressure data in the profile, and the git data would still be the old one. Until Dirk renumbered his dives, and the data was rewritten. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-12 20:38:22 +00:00
fixup_dc_sample_sensors(dive, dc);
/* Fix up cylinder pressures based on DC info */
fixup_dive_pressures(dive, dc);
fixup_dc_events(dc);
/* Fixup CCR / PSCR dives with o2sensor values, but without no_o2sensors */
fixup_no_o2sensors(dc);
/* If there are no samples, generate a fake profile based on depth and time */
if (dc->samples.empty())
fake_dc(dc);
}
struct dive *fixup_dive(struct dive *dive)
{
int i;
struct divecomputer *dc;
sanitize_cylinder_info(dive);
dive->maxcns = dive->cns;
/*
* Use the dive's temperatures for minimum and maximum in case
* we do not have temperatures recorded by DC.
*/
update_min_max_temperatures(dive, dive->watertemp);
for_each_dc (dive, dc)
fixup_dive_dc(dive, dc);
fixup_water_salinity(dive);
if (!dive->surface_pressure.mbar)
fixup_surface_pressure(dive);
fixup_meandepth(dive);
fixup_duration(dive);
fixup_watertemp(dive);
fixup_airtemp(dive);
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
cylinder_t *cyl = get_cylinder(dive, i);
add_cylinder_description(cyl->type);
if (same_rounded_pressure(cyl->sample_start, cyl->start))
cyl->start.mbar = 0;
if (same_rounded_pressure(cyl->sample_end, cyl->end))
cyl->end.mbar = 0;
}
update_cylinder_related_info(dive);
for (i = 0; i < dive->weightsystems.nr; i++) {
const weightsystem_t &ws = dive->weightsystems.weightsystems[i];
add_weightsystem_description(ws);
}
/* we should always have a uniq ID as that gets assigned during dive creation,
* but we want to make sure... */
if (!dive->id)
dive->id = dive_getUniqID();
return dive;
}
/* Don't pick a zero for MERGE_MIN() */
#define MERGE_MAX(res, a, b, n) res->n = std::max(a->n, b->n)
#define MERGE_MIN(res, a, b, n) res->n = (a->n) ? (b->n) ? std::min(a->n, b->n) : (a->n) : (b->n)
#define MERGE_TXT(res, a, b, n, sep) res->n = merge_text(a->n, b->n, sep)
#define MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, n) res->n = a->n ? a->n : b->n
/*
* This is like append_sample(), but if the distance from the last sample
* is excessive, we add two surface samples in between.
*
* This is so that if you merge two non-overlapping dives, we make sure
* that the time in between the dives is at the surface, not some "last
* sample that happened to be at a depth of 1.2m".
*/
static void merge_one_sample(const struct sample &sample, struct divecomputer *dc)
{
if (!dc->samples.empty()) {
const struct sample &prev = dc->samples.back();
int last_time = prev.time.seconds;
int last_depth = prev.depth.mm;
/*
* Only do surface events if the samples are more than
* a minute apart, and shallower than 5m
*/
if (sample.time.seconds > last_time + 60 && last_depth < 5000) {
struct sample surface;
/* Init a few values from prev sample to avoid useless info in XML */
surface.bearing.degrees = prev.bearing.degrees;
surface.ndl.seconds = prev.ndl.seconds;
surface.time.seconds = last_time + 20;
append_sample(surface, dc);
surface.time.seconds = sample.time.seconds - 20;
append_sample(surface, dc);
}
}
append_sample(sample, dc);
}
static void renumber_last_sample(struct divecomputer *dc, const int mapping[]);
static void sample_renumber(struct sample &s, const struct sample *next, const int mapping[]);
/*
* Merge samples. Dive 'a' is "offset" seconds before Dive 'b'
*/
static void merge_samples(struct divecomputer *res,
const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b,
const int *cylinders_map_a, const int *cylinders_map_b,
int offset)
{
auto as = a->samples.begin();
auto bs = b->samples.begin();
auto a_end = a->samples.end();
auto b_end = b->samples.end();
/*
* We want a positive sample offset, so that sample
* times are always positive. So if the samples for
* 'b' are before the samples for 'a' (so the offset
* is negative), we switch a and b around, and use
* the reverse offset.
*/
if (offset < 0) {
offset = -offset;
std::swap(as, bs);
std::swap(a_end, b_end);
std::swap(cylinders_map_a, cylinders_map_b);
}
for (;;) {
if (!res)
return;
int at = as != a_end ? as->time.seconds : -1;
int bt = bs != b_end ? bs->time.seconds + offset : -1;
/* No samples? All done! */
if (at < 0 && bt < 0)
return;
/* Only samples from a? */
if (bt < 0) {
add_sample_a:
merge_one_sample(*as, res);
renumber_last_sample(res, cylinders_map_a);
as++;
continue;
}
/* Only samples from b? */
if (at < 0) {
add_sample_b:
merge_one_sample(*bs, res);
renumber_last_sample(res, cylinders_map_b);
bs++;
continue;
}
if (at < bt)
goto add_sample_a;
if (at > bt)
goto add_sample_b;
/* same-time sample: add a merged sample. Take the non-zero ones */
struct sample sample = *bs;
sample_renumber(sample, nullptr, cylinders_map_b);
if (as->depth.mm)
sample.depth = as->depth;
if (as->temperature.mkelvin)
sample.temperature = as->temperature;
for (int j = 0; j < MAX_SENSORS; ++j) {
int sensor_id;
sensor_id = cylinders_map_a[as->sensor[j]];
if (sensor_id < 0)
continue;
if (as->pressure[j].mbar)
sample.pressure[j] = as->pressure[j];
if (as->sensor[j])
sample.sensor[j] = sensor_id;
}
if (as->cns)
sample.cns = as->cns;
if (as->setpoint.mbar)
sample.setpoint = as->setpoint;
if (as->ndl.seconds)
sample.ndl = as->ndl;
if (as->stoptime.seconds)
sample.stoptime = as->stoptime;
if (as->stopdepth.mm)
sample.stopdepth = as->stopdepth;
if (as->in_deco)
sample.in_deco = true;
merge_one_sample(sample, res);
as++;
bs++;
}
}
static bool operator==(const struct extra_data &e1, const struct extra_data &e2)
{
return std::tie(e1.key, e1.value) == std::tie(e2.key, e2.value);
}
/*
* Merge extra_data.
*
* The extra data from 'a' has already been copied into 'res'. So
* we really should just copy over the data from 'b' too.
*
* This is not hugely efficient (with the whole "check this for
* every value you merge" it's O(n**2)) but it's not like we
* have very many extra_data entries per dive computer anyway.
*/
static void merge_extra_data(struct divecomputer *res,
const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b)
{
for (auto &ed: b->extra_data) {
if (range_contains(a->extra_data, ed))
continue;
res->extra_data.push_back(ed);
}
}
static char *merge_text(const char *a, const char *b, const char *sep)
{
char *res;
if (!a && !b)
return NULL;
if (!a || !*a)
return copy_string(b);
if (!b || !*b)
return strdup(a);
if (!strcmp(a, b))
return copy_string(a);
res = (char *)malloc(strlen(a) + strlen(b) + 32);
if (!res)
return (char *)a;
sprintf(res, "%s%s%s", a, sep, b);
return res;
}
#define SORT(a, b) \
if (a != b) \
return a < b ? -1 : 1
#define SORT_FIELD(a, b, field) SORT(a.field, b.field)
static int sort_event(const struct event &a, const struct event &b, int time_a, int time_b)
{
SORT(time_a, time_b);
SORT_FIELD(a, b, type);
SORT_FIELD(a, b, flags);
SORT_FIELD(a, b, value);
return a.name.compare(b.name);
}
static int same_gas(const struct event *a, const struct event *b)
{
if (a->type == b->type && a->flags == b->flags && a->value == b->value && a->name == b->name &&
same_gasmix(a->gas.mix, b->gas.mix)) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
static void event_renumber(struct event &ev, const int mapping[]);
static void add_initial_gaschange(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, int offset, int idx);
static void merge_events(struct dive *d, struct divecomputer *res,
const struct divecomputer *src1, const struct divecomputer *src2,
const int *cylinders_map1, const int *cylinders_map2,
int offset)
{
const struct event *last_gas = NULL;
/* Always use positive offsets */
if (offset < 0) {
const struct divecomputer *tmp;
const int *cylinders_map_tmp;
offset = -offset;
tmp = src1;
src1 = src2;
src2 = tmp;
cylinders_map_tmp = cylinders_map1;
cylinders_map1 = cylinders_map2;
cylinders_map2 = cylinders_map_tmp;
}
auto a = src1->events.begin();
auto b = src2->events.begin();
while (a != src1->events.end() || b != src2->events.end()) {
int s = 0;
const struct event *pick;
const int *cylinders_map;
int event_offset;
if (b == src2->events.end())
goto pick_a;
if (a == src1->events.end())
goto pick_b;
s = sort_event(*a, *b, a->time.seconds, b->time.seconds + offset);
/* Identical events? Just skip one of them (we skip a) */
if (!s) {
++a;
continue;
}
/* Otherwise, pick the one that sorts first */
if (s < 0) {
pick_a:
pick = &*a;
++a;
event_offset = 0;
cylinders_map = cylinders_map1;
} else {
pick_b:
pick = &*b;
++b;
event_offset = offset;
cylinders_map = cylinders_map2;
}
/*
* If that's a gas-change that matches the previous
* gas change, we'll just skip it
*/
if (event_is_gaschange(*pick)) {
if (last_gas && same_gas(pick, last_gas))
continue;
last_gas = pick;
}
/* Add it to the target list */
res->events.push_back(*pick);
res->events.back().time.seconds += event_offset;
event_renumber(res->events.back(), cylinders_map);
}
/* If the initial cylinder of a divecomputer was remapped, add a gas change event to that cylinder */
if (cylinders_map1[0] > 0)
add_initial_gaschange(d, res, 0, cylinders_map1[0]);
if (cylinders_map2[0] > 0)
add_initial_gaschange(d, res, offset, cylinders_map2[0]);
}
/* get_cylinder_idx_by_use(): Find the index of the first cylinder with a particular CCR use type.
Calculate nitrogen and helium gas pressures for CCR after import from CSV Currently the gas pressures stored in structures of pressure are calculated using the gasmix composition of the currently selected cylinder. But with CCR dives the default cylinder is the oxygen cylinder (here, index 0). However, the gas pressures need to be calculated using gasmix data from cylinder 1 (the diluent cylinder). This patch allows setting the appropriate cylinder for calculating the values in the structures of pressure. It also allows for correctly calculating gas pressures for any open circuit cylinders (e.g. bailout) that a CCR diver may use. This is performed as follows: 1) In dive.h create an enum variable {oxygen, diluent, bailout} 2) Within the definition of cylinder_t, add a member: cylinder_use_type This stores an enum variable, one of the above. 3) In file.c where the Poseidon CSV data are read in, assign the appropriate enum values to each of the cylinders. 4) Within the definition of structure dive, add two members: int oxygen_cylinder_index int diluent_cylinder_index This will keep the indices of the two main CCR cylinders. 5) In dive.c create a function get_cylinder_use(). This scans the cylinders for that dive, looking for a cylinder that has a particular cylinder_use_type and returns that cylinder index. 6) In dive.c create a function fixup_cylinder_use() that stores the indices of the oxygen and diluent cylinders in the variables dive->oxygen_cylinder_index and dive->diluent_cylinder_index, making use of the function in 4) above. 7) In profile.c, modify function calculate_gas_information_new() to use the above functions for CCR dives to find the oxygen and diluent cylinders and to calculate partail gas pressures based on the diluent cylinder gas mix. This results in the correct calculation of gas partial pressures in the case of CCR dives, displaying the correct partial pressure graphs in the dive profile widget. Signed-off-by: willem ferguson <willemferguson@zoology.up.ac.za> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-11-03 20:11:00 +00:00
* The index returned corresponds to that of the first cylinder with a cylinder_use that
* equals the appropriate enum value [oxygen, diluent, bailout] given by cylinder_use_type.
* A negative number returned indicates that a match could not be found.
* Call parameters: dive = the dive being processed
* cylinder_use_type = an enum, one of {oxygen, diluent, bailout} */
int get_cylinder_idx_by_use(const struct dive *dive, enum cylinderuse cylinder_use_type)
Calculate nitrogen and helium gas pressures for CCR after import from CSV Currently the gas pressures stored in structures of pressure are calculated using the gasmix composition of the currently selected cylinder. But with CCR dives the default cylinder is the oxygen cylinder (here, index 0). However, the gas pressures need to be calculated using gasmix data from cylinder 1 (the diluent cylinder). This patch allows setting the appropriate cylinder for calculating the values in the structures of pressure. It also allows for correctly calculating gas pressures for any open circuit cylinders (e.g. bailout) that a CCR diver may use. This is performed as follows: 1) In dive.h create an enum variable {oxygen, diluent, bailout} 2) Within the definition of cylinder_t, add a member: cylinder_use_type This stores an enum variable, one of the above. 3) In file.c where the Poseidon CSV data are read in, assign the appropriate enum values to each of the cylinders. 4) Within the definition of structure dive, add two members: int oxygen_cylinder_index int diluent_cylinder_index This will keep the indices of the two main CCR cylinders. 5) In dive.c create a function get_cylinder_use(). This scans the cylinders for that dive, looking for a cylinder that has a particular cylinder_use_type and returns that cylinder index. 6) In dive.c create a function fixup_cylinder_use() that stores the indices of the oxygen and diluent cylinders in the variables dive->oxygen_cylinder_index and dive->diluent_cylinder_index, making use of the function in 4) above. 7) In profile.c, modify function calculate_gas_information_new() to use the above functions for CCR dives to find the oxygen and diluent cylinders and to calculate partail gas pressures based on the diluent cylinder gas mix. This results in the correct calculation of gas partial pressures in the case of CCR dives, displaying the correct partial pressure graphs in the dive profile widget. Signed-off-by: willem ferguson <willemferguson@zoology.up.ac.za> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-11-03 20:11:00 +00:00
{
int cylinder_index;
for (cylinder_index = 0; cylinder_index < dive->cylinders.nr; cylinder_index++) {
if (get_cylinder(dive, cylinder_index)->cylinder_use == cylinder_use_type)
Calculate nitrogen and helium gas pressures for CCR after import from CSV Currently the gas pressures stored in structures of pressure are calculated using the gasmix composition of the currently selected cylinder. But with CCR dives the default cylinder is the oxygen cylinder (here, index 0). However, the gas pressures need to be calculated using gasmix data from cylinder 1 (the diluent cylinder). This patch allows setting the appropriate cylinder for calculating the values in the structures of pressure. It also allows for correctly calculating gas pressures for any open circuit cylinders (e.g. bailout) that a CCR diver may use. This is performed as follows: 1) In dive.h create an enum variable {oxygen, diluent, bailout} 2) Within the definition of cylinder_t, add a member: cylinder_use_type This stores an enum variable, one of the above. 3) In file.c where the Poseidon CSV data are read in, assign the appropriate enum values to each of the cylinders. 4) Within the definition of structure dive, add two members: int oxygen_cylinder_index int diluent_cylinder_index This will keep the indices of the two main CCR cylinders. 5) In dive.c create a function get_cylinder_use(). This scans the cylinders for that dive, looking for a cylinder that has a particular cylinder_use_type and returns that cylinder index. 6) In dive.c create a function fixup_cylinder_use() that stores the indices of the oxygen and diluent cylinders in the variables dive->oxygen_cylinder_index and dive->diluent_cylinder_index, making use of the function in 4) above. 7) In profile.c, modify function calculate_gas_information_new() to use the above functions for CCR dives to find the oxygen and diluent cylinders and to calculate partail gas pressures based on the diluent cylinder gas mix. This results in the correct calculation of gas partial pressures in the case of CCR dives, displaying the correct partial pressure graphs in the dive profile widget. Signed-off-by: willem ferguson <willemferguson@zoology.up.ac.za> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-11-03 20:11:00 +00:00
return cylinder_index; // return the index of the cylinder with that cylinder use type
}
return -1; // negative number means cylinder_use_type not found in list of cylinders
}
/* Force an initial gaschange event to the (old) gas #0 */
static void add_initial_gaschange(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, int offset, int idx)
{
/* if there is a gaschange event up to 30 sec after the initial event,
* refrain from adding the initial event */
event_loop loop("gaschange");
while(auto ev = loop.next(*dc)) {
if (ev->time.seconds > offset + 30)
break;
else if (ev->time.seconds > offset)
return;
}
/* Old starting gas mix */
add_gas_switch_event(dive, dc, offset, idx);
}
static void sample_renumber(struct sample &s, const struct sample *prev, const int mapping[])
{
for (int j = 0; j < MAX_SENSORS; j++) {
int sensor = -1;
if (s.sensor[j] != NO_SENSOR)
sensor = mapping[s.sensor[j]];
if (sensor == -1) {
// Remove sensor and gas pressure info
if (!prev) {
s.sensor[j] = 0;
s.pressure[j].mbar = 0;
} else {
s.sensor[j] = prev->sensor[j];
s.pressure[j].mbar = prev->pressure[j].mbar;
}
} else {
s.sensor[j] = sensor;
Start cleaning up sensor indexing for multiple sensors This is a very timid start at making us actually use multiple sensors without the magical special case for just CCR oxygen tracking. It mainly does: - turn the "sample->sensor" index into an array of two indexes, to match the pressures themselves. - get rid of dive->{oxygen_cylinder_index,diluent_cylinder_index}, since a CCR dive should now simply set the sample->sensor[] indices correctly instead. - in a couple of places, start actually looping over the sensors rather than special-case the O2 case (although often the small "loops" are just unrolled, since it's just two cases. but in many cases we still end up only covering the zero sensor case, because the CCR O2 sensor code coverage was fairly limited. It's entirely possible (even likely) that this migth break some existing case: it tries to be a fairly direct ("stupid") translation of the old code, but unlike the preparatory patch this does actually does change some semantics. For example, right now the git loader code assumes that if the git save data contains a o2pressure entry, it just hardcodes the O2 sensor index to 1. In fact, one issue is going to simply be that our file formats do not have that multiple sensor format, but instead had very clearly encoded things as being the CCR O2 pressure sensor. But this is hopefully close to usable, and I will need feedback (and maybe test cases) from people who have existing CCR dives with pressure data. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2017-07-21 02:49:45 +00:00
}
}
}
static void renumber_last_sample(struct divecomputer *dc, const int mapping[])
{
if (dc->samples.empty())
return;
sample *prev = dc->samples.size() > 1 ? &dc->samples[dc->samples.size() - 2] : nullptr;
sample_renumber(dc->samples.back(), prev, mapping);
}
static void event_renumber(struct event &ev, const int mapping[])
{
if (!event_is_gaschange(ev))
return;
if (ev.gas.index < 0)
return;
ev.gas.index = mapping[ev.gas.index];
}
static void dc_cylinder_renumber(struct dive *dive, struct divecomputer *dc, const int mapping[])
{
/* Remap or delete the sensor indices */
for (auto [i, sample]: enumerated_range(dc->samples))
sample_renumber(sample, i > 0 ? &dc->samples[i-1] : nullptr, mapping);
/* Remap the gas change indices */
for (auto &ev: dc->events)
event_renumber(ev, mapping);
/* If the initial cylinder of a dive was remapped, add a gas change event to that cylinder */
if (mapping[0] > 0)
add_initial_gaschange(dive, dc, 0, mapping[0]);
}
/*
* If the cylinder indices change (due to merging dives or deleting
* cylinders in the middle), we need to change the indices in the
* dive computer data for this dive.
*
* Also note that we assume that the initial cylinder is cylinder 0,
* so if that got renamed, we need to create a fake gas change event
*/
void cylinder_renumber(struct dive *dive, int mapping[])
{
struct divecomputer *dc;
for_each_dc (dive, dc)
dc_cylinder_renumber(dive, dc, mapping);
}
int same_gasmix_cylinder(const cylinder_t *cyl, int cylid, const struct dive *dive, bool check_unused)
{
struct gasmix mygas = cyl->gasmix;
for (int i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
if (i == cylid)
continue;
struct gasmix gas2 = get_cylinder(dive, i)->gasmix;
if (gasmix_distance(mygas, gas2) == 0 && (is_cylinder_used(dive, i) || check_unused))
return i;
}
return -1;
}
static int pdiff(pressure_t a, pressure_t b)
{
return a.mbar && b.mbar && a.mbar != b.mbar;
}
static int different_manual_pressures(const cylinder_t *a, const cylinder_t *b)
{
return pdiff(a->start, b->start) || pdiff(a->end, b->end);
}
/*
* Can we find an exact match for a cylinder in another dive?
* Take the "already matched" map into account, so that we
* don't match multiple similar cylinders to one target.
*
* To match, the cylinders have to have the same gasmix and the
* same cylinder use (ie OC/Diluent/Oxygen), and if pressures
* have been added manually they need to match.
*/
static int match_cylinder(const cylinder_t *cyl, const struct dive *dive, const bool try_match[])
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < dive->cylinders.nr; i++) {
const cylinder_t *target;
if (!try_match[i])
continue;
target = get_cylinder(dive, i);
if (!same_gasmix(cyl->gasmix, target->gasmix))
continue;
if (cyl->cylinder_use != target->cylinder_use)
continue;
if (different_manual_pressures(cyl, target))
continue;
/* open question: Should we check sizes too? */
return i;
}
return -1;
}
/*
* Function used to merge manually set start or end pressures. This
* is used to merge cylinders when merging dives. We store up to two
* values for start _and_ end pressures: one derived from samples and
* one entered manually, whereby the latter takes precedence. It may
* happen that the user merges two dives where one has a manual,
* the other only a sample-derived pressure. In such a case we want to
* supplement the non-existing manual value by a sample derived one.
* Otherwise, the merged dive would end up with incomplete pressure
* information.
* The last argument to the function specifies whether the larger
* or smaller value of the two dives should be returned. Obviously,
* for the starting pressure we want the larger and for the ending
* pressure the smaller value.
*/
static pressure_t merge_pressures(pressure_t a, pressure_t sample_a, pressure_t b, pressure_t sample_b, bool take_min)
{
if (!a.mbar && !b.mbar)
return a;
if (!a.mbar)
a = sample_a;
if (!b.mbar)
b = sample_b;
if (!a.mbar)
a = b;
if (!b.mbar)
b = a;
if (take_min)
return a.mbar < b.mbar? a : b;
return a.mbar > b.mbar? a : b;
}
/*
* We matched things up so that they have the same gasmix and
* use, but we might want to fill in any missing cylinder details
* in 'a' if we had it from 'b'.
*/
static void merge_one_cylinder(cylinder_t *a, const cylinder_t *b)
{
if (!a->type.size.mliter)
a->type.size.mliter = b->type.size.mliter;
if (!a->type.workingpressure.mbar)
a->type.workingpressure.mbar = b->type.workingpressure.mbar;
if (empty_string(a->type.description))
a->type.description = copy_string(b->type.description);
/* If either cylinder has manually entered pressures, try to merge them.
* Use pressures from divecomputer samples if only one cylinder has such a value.
* Yes, this is an actual use case we encountered.
* Note that we don't merge the sample-derived pressure values, as this is
* perfomed after merging in fixup_dive() */
a->start = merge_pressures(a->start, a->sample_start, b->start, b->sample_start, false);
a->end = merge_pressures(a->end, a->sample_end, b->end, b->sample_end, true);
/* Really? */
a->gas_used.mliter += b->gas_used.mliter;
a->deco_gas_used.mliter += b->deco_gas_used.mliter;
a->bestmix_o2 = a->bestmix_o2 && b->bestmix_o2;
a->bestmix_he = a->bestmix_he && b->bestmix_he;
}
static bool cylinder_has_data(const cylinder_t *cyl)
{
return !cyl->type.size.mliter &&
!cyl->type.workingpressure.mbar &&
!cyl->type.description &&
!cyl->gasmix.o2.permille &&
!cyl->gasmix.he.permille &&
!cyl->start.mbar &&
!cyl->end.mbar &&
!cyl->sample_start.mbar &&
!cyl->sample_end.mbar &&
!cyl->gas_used.mliter &&
!cyl->deco_gas_used.mliter;
}
static bool cylinder_in_use(const struct dive *dive, int idx)
{
if (idx < 0 || idx >= dive->cylinders.nr)
return false;
/* This tests for gaschange events or pressure changes */
if (is_cylinder_used(dive, idx) || prefs.include_unused_tanks)
return true;
/* This tests for typenames or gas contents */
return cylinder_has_data(get_cylinder(dive, idx));
}
/*
* Merging cylinder information is non-trivial, because the two dive computers
* may have different ideas of what the different cylinder indexing is.
*
* Logic: take all the cylinder information from the preferred dive ('a'), and
* then try to match each of the cylinders in the other dive by the gasmix that
* is the best match and hasn't been used yet.
*
* For each dive, a cylinder-renumbering table is returned.
*/
static void merge_cylinders(struct dive *res, const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b,
int mapping_a[], int mapping_b[])
{
int i;
int max_cylinders = a->cylinders.nr + b->cylinders.nr;
auto used_in_a = std::make_unique<bool[]>(max_cylinders);
auto used_in_b = std::make_unique<bool[]>(max_cylinders);
auto try_to_match = std::make_unique<bool[]>(max_cylinders);
std::fill(try_to_match.get(), try_to_match.get() + max_cylinders, false);
/* First, clear all cylinders in destination */
clear_cylinder_table(&res->cylinders);
/* Clear all cylinder mappings */
std::fill(mapping_a, mapping_a + a->cylinders.nr, -1);
std::fill(mapping_b, mapping_b + b->cylinders.nr, -1);
/* Calculate usage map of cylinders, clear matching map */
for (i = 0; i < max_cylinders; i++) {
used_in_a[i] = cylinder_in_use(a, i);
used_in_b[i] = cylinder_in_use(b, i);
}
/*
* For each cylinder in 'a' that is used, copy it to 'res'.
* These are also potential matches for 'b' to use.
*/
for (i = 0; i < max_cylinders; i++) {
int res_nr = res->cylinders.nr;
if (!used_in_a[i])
continue;
mapping_a[i] = res_nr;
try_to_match[res_nr] = true;
add_cloned_cylinder(&res->cylinders, *get_cylinder(a, i));
}
/*
* For each cylinder in 'b' that is used, try to match it
* with an existing cylinder in 'res' from 'a'
*/
for (i = 0; i < b->cylinders.nr; i++) {
int j;
if (!used_in_b[i])
continue;
j = match_cylinder(get_cylinder(b, i), res, try_to_match.get());
/* No match? Add it to the result */
if (j < 0) {
int res_nr = res->cylinders.nr;
mapping_b[i] = res_nr;
add_cloned_cylinder(&res->cylinders, *get_cylinder(b, i));
continue;
}
/* Otherwise, merge the result to the one we found */
mapping_b[i] = j;
merge_one_cylinder(get_cylinder(res,j), get_cylinder(b, i));
/* Don't match the same target more than once */
try_to_match[j] = false;
}
}
/* Check whether a weightsystem table contains a given weightsystem */
static bool has_weightsystem(const struct weightsystem_table *t, const weightsystem_t w)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < t->nr; i++) {
if (same_weightsystem(w, t->weightsystems[i]))
return true;
}
return false;
}
static void merge_equipment(struct dive *res, const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < a->weightsystems.nr; i++) {
if (!has_weightsystem(&res->weightsystems, a->weightsystems.weightsystems[i]))
add_cloned_weightsystem(&res->weightsystems, a->weightsystems.weightsystems[i]);
}
for (i = 0; i < b->weightsystems.nr; i++) {
if (!has_weightsystem(&res->weightsystems, b->weightsystems.weightsystems[i]))
add_cloned_weightsystem(&res->weightsystems, b->weightsystems.weightsystems[i]);
}
}
static void merge_temperatures(struct dive *res, const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b)
{
temperature_t airtemp_a = un_fixup_airtemp(a);
temperature_t airtemp_b = un_fixup_airtemp(b);
res->airtemp = airtemp_a.mkelvin ? airtemp_a : airtemp_b;
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, watertemp.mkelvin);
}
/*
* Pick a trip for a dive
*/
static struct dive_trip *get_preferred_trip(const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b)
{
dive_trip_t *atrip, *btrip;
/* If only one dive has a trip, choose that */
atrip = a->divetrip;
btrip = b->divetrip;
if (!atrip)
return btrip;
if (!btrip)
return atrip;
/* Both dives have a trip - prefer the non-autogenerated one */
if (atrip->autogen && !btrip->autogen)
return btrip;
if (!atrip->autogen && btrip->autogen)
return atrip;
/* Otherwise, look at the trip data and pick the "better" one */
if (!atrip->location)
return btrip;
if (!btrip->location)
return atrip;
if (!atrip->notes)
return btrip;
if (!btrip->notes)
return atrip;
/*
* Ok, so both have location and notes.
* Pick the earlier one.
*/
if (a->when < b->when)
return atrip;
return btrip;
}
#if CURRENTLY_NOT_USED
/*
* Sample 's' is between samples 'a' and 'b'. It is 'offset' seconds before 'b'.
*
* If 's' and 'a' are at the same time, offset is 0.
*/
static int compare_sample(const struct sample &s, const struct sample &a, const struct sample &b, int offset)
{
unsigned int depth = a.depth.mm;
int diff;
if (offset) {
unsigned int interval = b.time.seconds - a.time.seconds;
unsigned int depth_a = a.depth.mm;
unsigned int depth_b = b.depth.mm;
if (offset > interval)
return -1;
/* pick the average depth, scaled by the offset from 'b' */
depth = (depth_a * offset) + (depth_b * (interval - offset));
depth /= interval;
}
diff = s.depth.mm - depth;
if (diff < 0)
diff = -diff;
/* cut off at one meter difference */
if (diff > 1000)
diff = 1000;
return diff * diff;
}
/*
* Calculate a "difference" in samples between the two dives, given
* the offset in seconds between them. Use this to find the best
* match of samples between two different dive computers.
*/
static unsigned long sample_difference(struct divecomputer *a, struct divecomputer *b, int offset)
{
if (a->samples.empty() || b->samples.empty())
return;
unsigned long error = 0;
int start = -1;
if (!asamples || !bsamples)
return 0;
/*
* skip the first sample - this way we know can always look at
* as/bs[-1] to look at the samples around it in the loop.
*/
auto as = a->samples.begin() + 1;
auto bs = a->samples.begin() + 1;
for (;;) {
/* If we run out of samples, punt */
if (as == a->samples.end())
return INT_MAX;
if (bs == b->samples.end())
return INT_MAX;
int at = as->time.seconds;
int bt = bs->time.seconds + offset;
/* b hasn't started yet? Ignore it */
if (bt < 0) {
++bs;
continue;
}
int diff;
if (at < bt) {
diff = compare_sample(*as, *std::prev(bs), *bs, bt - at);
++as;
} else if (at > bt) {
diff = compare_sample(*bs, *std::prev(as), *as, at - bt);
++bs;
} else {
diff = compare_sample(*as, *bs, *bs, 0);
++as;
++bs;
}
/* Invalid comparison point? */
if (diff < 0)
continue;
if (start < 0)
start = at;
error += diff;
if (at - start > 120)
break;
}
return error;
}
/*
* Dive 'a' is 'offset' seconds before dive 'b'
*
* This is *not* because the dive computers clocks aren't in sync,
* it is because the dive computers may "start" the dive at different
* points in the dive, so the sample at time X in dive 'a' is the
* same as the sample at time X+offset in dive 'b'.
*
* For example, some dive computers take longer to "wake up" when
* they sense that you are under water (ie Uemis Zurich if it was off
* when the dive started). And other dive computers have different
* depths that they activate at, etc etc.
*
* If we cannot find a shared offset, don't try to merge.
*/
static int find_sample_offset(struct divecomputer *a, struct divecomputer *b)
{
/* No samples? Merge at any time (0 offset) */
if (a->samples.empty())
return 0;
if (b->samples.empty())
return 0;
/*
* Common special-case: merging a dive that came from
* the same dive computer, so the samples are identical.
* Check this first, without wasting time trying to find
* some minimal offset case.
*/
int best = 0;
unsigned long max = sample_difference(a, b, 0);
if (!max)
return 0;
/*
* Otherwise, look if we can find anything better within
* a thirty second window..
*/
for (int offset = -30; offset <= 30; offset++) {
unsigned long diff;
int diff = sample_difference(a, b, offset);
if (diff > max)
continue;
best = offset;
max = diff;
}
return best;
}
#endif
/*
* Are a and b "similar" values, when given a reasonable lower end expected
* difference?
*
* So for example, we'd expect different dive computers to give different
2017-03-06 12:27:39 +00:00
* max. depth readings. You might have them on different arms, and they
* have different pressure sensors and possibly different ideas about
* water salinity etc.
*
* So have an expected minimum difference, but also allow a larger relative
* error value.
*/
static int similar(unsigned long a, unsigned long b, unsigned long expected)
{
if (!a && !b)
return 1;
if (a && b) {
unsigned long min, max, diff;
min = a;
max = b;
if (a > b) {
min = b;
max = a;
}
diff = max - min;
/* Smaller than expected difference? */
if (diff < expected)
return 1;
/* Error less than 10% or the maximum */
if (diff * 10 < max)
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
/*
* Match every dive computer against each other to see if
* we have a matching dive.
*
* Return values:
* -1 for "is definitely *NOT* the same dive"
* 0 for "don't know"
* 1 for "is definitely the same dive"
*/
static int match_dc_dive(const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b)
{
do {
const struct divecomputer *tmp = b;
do {
int match = match_one_dc(a, tmp);
if (match)
return match;
tmp = tmp->next;
} while (tmp);
a = a->next;
} while (a);
return 0;
}
/*
* Do we want to automatically try to merge two dives that
* look like they are the same dive?
*
* This happens quite commonly because you download a dive
* that you already had, or perhaps because you maintained
* multiple dive logs and want to load them all together
* (possibly one of them was imported from another dive log
* application entirely).
*
* NOTE! We mainly look at the dive time, but it can differ
* between two dives due to a few issues:
*
* - rounding the dive date to the nearest minute in other dive
* applications
*
* - dive computers with "relative datestamps" (ie the dive
* computer doesn't actually record an absolute date at all,
* but instead at download-time synchronizes its internal
* time with real-time on the downloading computer)
*
* - using multiple dive computers with different real time on
* the same dive
*
* We do not merge dives that look radically different, and if
* the dates are *too* far off the user will have to join two
* dives together manually. But this tries to handle the sane
* cases.
*/
static int likely_same_dive(const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b)
{
int match, fuzz = 20 * 60;
/* don't merge manually added dives with anything */
if (is_dc_manually_added_dive(&a->dc) ||
is_dc_manually_added_dive(&b->dc))
return 0;
/*
* Do some basic sanity testing of the values we
* have filled in during 'fixup_dive()'
*/
if (!similar(a->maxdepth.mm, b->maxdepth.mm, 1000) ||
(a->meandepth.mm && b->meandepth.mm && !similar(a->meandepth.mm, b->meandepth.mm, 1000)) ||
!a->duration.seconds || !b->duration.seconds ||
!similar(a->duration.seconds, b->duration.seconds, 5 * 60))
return 0;
/* See if we can get an exact match on the dive computer */
match = match_dc_dive(&a->dc, &b->dc);
if (match)
return match > 0;
/*
* Allow a time difference due to dive computer time
* setting etc. Check if they overlap.
*/
fuzz = std::max(a->duration.seconds, b->duration.seconds) / 2;
if (fuzz < 60)
fuzz = 60;
return (a->when <= b->when + fuzz) && (a->when >= b->when - fuzz);
}
/*
* This could do a lot more merging. Right now it really only
* merges almost exact duplicates - something that happens easily
* with overlapping dive downloads.
*
* If new dives are merged into the dive table, dive a is supposed to
* be the old dive and dive b is supposed to be the newly imported
* dive. If the flag "prefer_downloaded" is set, data of the latter
* will take priority over the former.
*
* Attn: The dive_site parameter of the dive will be set, but the caller
* still has to register the dive in the dive site!
*/
struct dive *try_to_merge(struct dive *a, struct dive *b, bool prefer_downloaded)
{
struct dive *res;
struct dive_site *site;
if (!likely_same_dive(a, b))
return NULL;
res = merge_dives(a, b, 0, prefer_downloaded, NULL, &site);
res->dive_site = site; /* Caller has to call site->add_dive()! */
return res;
}
static bool operator==(const sample &a, const sample &b)
{
if (a.time.seconds != b.time.seconds)
return false;
if (a.depth.mm != b.depth.mm)
return false;
if (a.temperature.mkelvin != b.temperature.mkelvin)
return false;
if (a.pressure[0].mbar != b.pressure[0].mbar)
return false;
return a.sensor[0] == b.sensor[0];
}
static int same_dc(struct divecomputer *a, struct divecomputer *b)
{
int i;
i = match_one_dc(a, b);
if (i)
return i > 0;
if (a->when && b->when && a->when != b->when)
return 0;
if (a->samples != b->samples)
return 0;
return a->events == b->events;
}
static int might_be_same_device(const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b)
{
/* No dive computer model? That matches anything */
if (a->model.empty() || b->model.empty())
return 1;
/* Otherwise at least the model names have to match */
if (strcasecmp(a->model.c_str(), b->model.c_str()))
return 0;
/* No device ID? Match */
if (!a->deviceid || !b->deviceid)
return 1;
return a->deviceid == b->deviceid;
}
static void remove_redundant_dc(struct divecomputer *dc, int prefer_downloaded)
{
do {
struct divecomputer **p = &dc->next;
/* Check this dc against all the following ones.. */
while (*p) {
struct divecomputer *check = *p;
if (same_dc(dc, check) || (prefer_downloaded && might_be_same_device(dc, check))) {
*p = check->next;
check->next = NULL;
delete check;
continue;
}
p = &check->next;
}
/* .. and then continue down the chain, but we */
prefer_downloaded = 0;
dc = dc->next;
} while (dc);
}
static const struct divecomputer *find_matching_computer(const struct divecomputer *match, const struct divecomputer *list)
{
const struct divecomputer *p;
while ((p = list) != NULL) {
list = list->next;
if (might_be_same_device(match, p))
break;
}
return p;
}
static void copy_dive_computer(struct divecomputer *res, const struct divecomputer *a)
{
*res = *a;
res->samples.clear();
res->events.clear();
res->next = NULL;
}
/*
* Join dive computers with a specific time offset between
* them.
*
* Use the dive computer ID's (or names, if ID's are missing)
* to match them up. If we find a matching dive computer, we
* merge them. If not, we just take the data from 'a'.
*/
static void interleave_dive_computers(struct dive *d, struct divecomputer *res,
const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b,
const int cylinders_map_a[], const int cylinders_map_b[],
int offset)
{
do {
const struct divecomputer *match;
copy_dive_computer(res, a);
match = find_matching_computer(a, b);
if (match) {
merge_events(d, res, a, match, cylinders_map_a, cylinders_map_b, offset);
merge_samples(res, a, match, cylinders_map_a, cylinders_map_b, offset);
merge_extra_data(res, a, match);
/* Use the diveid of the later dive! */
if (offset > 0)
res->diveid = match->diveid;
} else {
copy_dc_renumber(d, a, res, cylinders_map_a);
}
a = a->next;
if (!a)
break;
res->next = new divecomputer;
res = res->next;
} while (res);
}
/*
* Join dive computer information.
*
* If we have old-style dive computer information (no model
* name etc), we will prefer a new-style one and just throw
* away the old. We're assuming it's a re-download.
*
* Otherwise, we'll just try to keep all the information,
* unless the user has specified that they prefer the
* downloaded computer, in which case we'll aggressively
* try to throw out old information that *might* be from
* that one.
*/
static void join_dive_computers(struct dive *d, struct divecomputer *res,
const struct divecomputer *a, const struct divecomputer *b,
const int cylinders_map_a[], const int cylinders_map_b[],
int prefer_downloaded)
{
struct divecomputer *tmp;
if (!a->model.empty() && b->model.empty()) {
copy_dc_renumber(d, a, res, cylinders_map_a);
return;
}
if (!b->model.empty() && a->model.empty()) {
copy_dc_renumber(d, b, res, cylinders_map_b);
return;
}
copy_dc_renumber(d, a, res, cylinders_map_a);
tmp = res;
while (tmp->next)
tmp = tmp->next;
tmp->next = new divecomputer;
copy_dc_renumber(d, b, tmp->next, cylinders_map_b);
remove_redundant_dc(res, prefer_downloaded);
}
static bool has_dc_type(const struct dive *dive, bool dc_is_planner)
{
const struct divecomputer *dc = &dive->dc;
while (dc) {
if (is_dc_planner(dc) == dc_is_planner)
return true;
dc = dc->next;
}
return false;
}
// Does this dive have a dive computer for which is_dc_planner has value planned
bool is_planned(const struct dive *dive)
{
return has_dc_type(dive, true);
}
bool is_logged(const struct dive *dive)
{
return has_dc_type(dive, false);
}
/*
* Merging two dives can be subtle, because there's two different ways
* of merging:
*
* (a) two distinctly _different_ dives that have the same dive computer
* are merged into one longer dive, because the user asked for it
* in the divelist.
*
* Because this case is with the same dive computer, we *know* the
* two must have a different start time, and "offset" is the relative
* time difference between the two.
*
* (b) two different dive computers that we might want to merge into
* one single dive with multiple dive computers.
*
* This is the "try_to_merge()" case, which will have offset == 0,
* even if the dive times might be different.
*
* If new dives are merged into the dive table, dive a is supposed to
* be the old dive and dive b is supposed to be the newly imported
* dive. If the flag "prefer_downloaded" is set, data of the latter
* will take priority over the former.
*
* The trip the new dive should be associated with (if any) is returned
* in the "trip" output parameter.
*
* The dive site the new dive should be added to (if any) is returned
* in the "dive_site" output parameter.
*/
struct dive *merge_dives(const struct dive *a, const struct dive *b, int offset, bool prefer_downloaded, struct dive_trip **trip, struct dive_site **site)
{
struct dive *res = new dive;
if (offset) {
/*
* If "likely_same_dive()" returns true, that means that
* it is *not* the same dive computer, and we do not want
* to try to turn it into a single longer dive. So we'd
* join them as two separate dive computers at zero offset.
*/
if (likely_same_dive(a, b))
offset = 0;
}
if (is_dc_planner(&a->dc)) {
const struct dive *tmp = a;
a = b;
b = tmp;
}
res->when = prefer_downloaded ? b->when : a->when;
res->selected = a->selected || b->selected;
if (trip)
*trip = get_preferred_trip(a, b);
MERGE_TXT(res, a, b, notes, "\n--\n");
MERGE_TXT(res, a, b, buddy, ", ");
MERGE_TXT(res, a, b, diveguide, ", ");
MERGE_MAX(res, a, b, rating);
MERGE_TXT(res, a, b, suit, ", ");
Be smarter about dive renumbering when merging dives We really have two different cases for merging dives: (a) downloading a new dive from a dive computer, and merging it with an existing dive that we had already created using a different dive computer. This is the "try_to_merge()" case, called from "process_dives() (b) merging two different dives into one longer dive. This is the "merge_two_dives()" case when you explicitly merge dives using the divelist. While a lot of the issues are the same, many details differ, and one of the details is how dive numbering should be handled. In particular, when you download from a dive computer and merge with an existing dive, you want too take the *maximum* dive number, because the dive computer notion of which dive it is may well not match what the user dive number is. On the other hand, when you explicitly merge in the dive list, you end up renumbering not just the dive you are merging, but also all subsequent dives, since you now have one fewer dives overall. So that case already has to be handled by the caller. Now, the simpler "download from dive computer" case was broken by commit ce3a78efcac2 ("Assign lower number to a merged dive instead of higher one"). It fixed the numbering for the divelist case, but broke the download case. So this commit reverts commit ce3a78efcac2, and instead extends and clarifies the dive renumbering that "merge_two_dives()" already did. It now explicitly renumbers not just the following dives, but also renumbers the merged dive itself, so now we can go back to the old "take the bigger dive number" for the core merging, which fixes the download case. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2016-03-30 19:42:27 +00:00
MERGE_MAX(res, a, b, number);
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, visibility);
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, wavesize);
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, current);
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, surge);
MERGE_NONZERO(res, a, b, chill);
copy_pictures(a->pictures.nr ? &a->pictures : &b->pictures, &res->pictures);
Get rid of crazy empty tag_list element at the start So this is totally unrelated to the git repository format, except for the fact that I noticed it while writing the git saving code. The subsurface divetag list handling is being stupid, and has a initial dummy entry at the head of the list for no good reason. I say "no good reason", because there *is* a reason for it: it allows code to avoid the special case of empty list and adding entries to before the first entry etc etc. But that reason is a really *bad* reason, because it's valid only because people don't understand basic list manipulation and pointers to pointers. So get rid of the dummy element, and do things right instead - by passing a *pointer* to the list, instead of the list. And then when traversing the list and looking for a place to insert things, don't go to the next entry - just update the "pointer to pointer" to point to the address of the next entry. Each entry in a C linked list is no different than the list itself, so you can use the pointer to the pointer to the next entry as a pointer to the list. This is a pet peeve of mine. The real beauty of pointers can never be understood unless you understand the indirection they allow. People who grew up with Pascal and were corrupted by that mindset are mentally stunted. Niklaus Wirth has a lot to answer for! But never fear. You too can overcome that mental limitation, it just needs some brain exercise. Reading this patch may help. In particular, contemplate the new "taglist_add_divetag()". Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
2014-03-10 17:18:13 +00:00
taglist_merge(&res->tag_list, a->tag_list, b->tag_list);
/* if we get dives without any gas / cylinder information in an import, make sure
* that there is at leatst one entry in the cylinder map for that dive */
auto cylinders_map_a = std::make_unique<int[]>(std::max(1, a->cylinders.nr));
auto cylinders_map_b = std::make_unique<int[]>(std::max(1, b->cylinders.nr));
merge_cylinders(res, a, b, cylinders_map_a.get(), cylinders_map_b.get());
merge_equipment(res, a, b);
merge_temperatures(res, a, b);
if (prefer_downloaded) {
/* If we prefer downloaded, do those first, and get rid of "might be same" computers */
join_dive_computers(res, &res->dc, &b->dc, &a->dc, cylinders_map_b.get(), cylinders_map_a.get(), 1);
} else if (offset && might_be_same_device(&a->dc, &b->dc))
interleave_dive_computers(res, &res->dc, &a->dc, &b->dc, cylinders_map_a.get(), cylinders_map_b.get(), offset);
else
join_dive_computers(res, &res->dc, &a->dc, &b->dc, cylinders_map_a.get(), cylinders_map_b.get(), 0);
/* The CNS values will be recalculated from the sample in fixup_dive() */
res->cns = res->maxcns = 0;
/* we take the first dive site, unless it's empty */
*site = a->dive_site && !a->dive_site->is_empty() ? a->dive_site : b->dive_site;
if (!dive_site_has_gps_location(*site) && dive_site_has_gps_location(b->dive_site)) {
/* we picked the first dive site and that didn't have GPS data, but the new dive has
* GPS data (that could be a download from a GPS enabled dive computer).
* Keep the dive site, but add the GPS data */
(*site)->location = b->dive_site->location;
}
fixup_dive(res);
return res;
}
// copy_dive(), but retaining the new ID for the copied dive
static struct dive *create_new_copy(const struct dive *from)
{
struct dive *to = new dive;
// dive creation gave us a new ID, we just need to
// make sure it's not overwritten.
int id = to->id;
copy_dive(from, to);
to->id = id;
return to;
}
struct start_end_pressure {
pressure_t start;
pressure_t end;
};
static void force_fixup_dive(struct dive *d)
{
struct divecomputer *dc = &d->dc;
int old_temp = dc->watertemp.mkelvin;
int old_mintemp = d->mintemp.mkelvin;
int old_maxtemp = d->maxtemp.mkelvin;
duration_t old_duration = d->duration;
std::vector<start_end_pressure> old_pressures(d->cylinders.nr);
d->maxdepth.mm = 0;
dc->maxdepth.mm = 0;
d->watertemp.mkelvin = 0;
dc->watertemp.mkelvin = 0;
d->duration.seconds = 0;
d->maxtemp.mkelvin = 0;
d->mintemp.mkelvin = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < d->cylinders.nr; i++) {
cylinder_t *cyl = get_cylinder(d, i);
old_pressures[i].start = cyl->start;
old_pressures[i].end = cyl->end;
cyl->start.mbar = 0;
cyl->end.mbar = 0;
}
fixup_dive(d);
if (!d->watertemp.mkelvin)
d->watertemp.mkelvin = old_temp;
if (!dc->watertemp.mkelvin)
dc->watertemp.mkelvin = old_temp;
if (!d->maxtemp.mkelvin)
d->maxtemp.mkelvin = old_maxtemp;
if (!d->mintemp.mkelvin)
d->mintemp.mkelvin = old_mintemp;
if (!d->duration.seconds)
d->duration = old_duration;
for (int i = 0; i < d->cylinders.nr; i++) {
if (!get_cylinder(d, i)->start.mbar)
get_cylinder(d, i)->start = old_pressures[i].start;
if (!get_cylinder(d, i)->end.mbar)
get_cylinder(d, i)->end = old_pressures[i].end;
}
}
/*
* Split a dive that has a surface interval from samples 'a' to 'b'
* into two dives, but don't add them to the log yet.
* Returns the nr of the old dive or <0 on failure.
* Moreover, on failure both output dives are set to NULL.
* On success, the newly allocated dives are returned in out1 and out2.
*/
static int split_dive_at(const struct dive *dive, int a, int b, struct dive **out1, struct dive **out2)
{
int nr;
int32_t t;
struct dive *d1, *d2;
struct divecomputer *dc1, *dc2;
/* if we can't find the dive in the dive list, don't bother */
if ((nr = get_divenr(dive)) < 0)
return -1;
/* Splitting should leave at least 3 samples per dive */
if (a < 3 || static_cast<size_t>(b + 4) > dive->dc.samples.size())
return -1;
/* We're not trying to be efficient here.. */
d1 = create_new_copy(dive);
d2 = create_new_copy(dive);
d1->divetrip = d2->divetrip = 0;
/* now unselect the first first segment so we don't keep all
* dives selected by mistake. But do keep the second one selected
* so the algorithm keeps splitting the dive further */
d1->selected = false;
dc1 = &d1->dc;
dc2 = &d2->dc;
/*
* Cut off the samples of d1 at the beginning
* of the interval.
*/
dc1->samples.resize(a);
/* And get rid of the 'b' first samples of d2 */
dc2->samples.erase(dc2->samples.begin(), dc2->samples.begin() + b);
/* Now the secondary dive computers */
t = dc2->samples[0].time.seconds;
while ((dc1 = dc1->next)) {
auto it = std::find_if(dc1->samples.begin(), dc1->samples.end(),
[t](auto &sample) { return sample.time.seconds >= t; });
dc1->samples.erase(it, dc1->samples.end());
}
while ((dc2 = dc2->next)) {
auto it = std::find_if(dc2->samples.begin(), dc2->samples.end(),
[t](auto &sample) { return sample.time.seconds >= t; });
dc2->samples.erase(dc2->samples.begin(), it);
}
dc1 = &d1->dc;
dc2 = &d2->dc;
/*
* This is where we cut off events from d1,
* and shift everything in d2
*/
d2->when += t;
while (dc1 && dc2) {
dc2->when += t;
for (auto &sample: dc2->samples)
sample.time.seconds -= t;
/* Remove the events past 't' from d1 */
auto it = std::lower_bound(dc1->events.begin(), dc1->events.end(), t,
[] (struct event &ev, int t)
{ return ev.time.seconds < t; });
dc1->events.erase(it, dc1->events.end());
/* Remove the events before 't' from d2, and shift the rest */
it = std::lower_bound(dc2->events.begin(), dc2->events.end(), t,
[] (struct event &ev, int t)
{ return ev.time.seconds < t; });
dc2->events.erase(dc2->events.begin(), it);
for (auto &ev: dc2->events)
ev.time.seconds -= t;
dc1 = dc1->next;
dc2 = dc2->next;
}
force_fixup_dive(d1);
force_fixup_dive(d2);
/*
* Was the dive numbered? If it was the last dive, then we'll
* increment the dive number for the tail part that we split off.
* Otherwise the tail is unnumbered.
*/
if (d2->number) {
if (divelog.dives->nr == nr + 1)
d2->number++;
else
d2->number = 0;
}
*out1 = d1;
*out2 = d2;
return nr;
}
/* in freedive mode we split for as little as 10 seconds on the surface,
* otherwise we use a minute */
static bool should_split(const struct divecomputer *dc, int t1, int t2)
{
int threshold = dc->divemode == FREEDIVE ? 10 : 60;
return t2 - t1 >= threshold;
}
/*
* Try to split a dive into multiple dives at a surface interval point.
*
* NOTE! We will split when there is at least one surface event that has
* non-surface events on both sides.
*
* The surface interval points are determined using the first dive computer.
*
* In other words, this is a (simplified) reversal of the dive merging.
*/
int split_dive(const struct dive *dive, struct dive **new1, struct dive **new2)
{
*new1 = *new2 = NULL;
if (!dive)
return -1;
const struct divecomputer *dc = &dive->dc;
bool at_surface = true;
if (dc->samples.empty())
return -1;
auto surface_start = dc->samples.begin();
for (auto it = dc->samples.begin() + 1; it != dc->samples.end(); ++it) {
bool surface_sample = it->depth.mm < SURFACE_THRESHOLD;
/*
* We care about the transition from and to depth 0,
* not about the depth staying similar.
*/
if (at_surface == surface_sample)
continue;
at_surface = surface_sample;
// Did it become surface after having been non-surface? We found the start
if (at_surface) {
surface_start = it;
continue;
}
// Going down again? We want at least a minute from
// the surface start.
if (surface_start == dc->samples.begin())
continue;
if (!should_split(dc, surface_start->time.seconds, std::prev(it)->time.seconds))
continue;
return split_dive_at(dive, surface_start - dc->samples.begin(), it - dc->samples.begin() - 1, new1, new2);
}
return -1;
}
int split_dive_at_time(const struct dive *dive, duration_t time, struct dive **new1, struct dive **new2)
{
if (!dive)
return -1;
auto it = std::find_if(dive->dc.samples.begin(), dive->dc.samples.end(),
[time](auto &sample) { return sample.time.seconds >= time.seconds; });
if (it == dive->dc.samples.end())
return -1;
size_t idx = it - dive->dc.samples.begin();
if (idx < 1)
return -1;
return split_dive_at(dive, static_cast<int>(idx), static_cast<int>(idx - 1), new1, new2);
}
/*
* "dc_maxtime()" is how much total time this dive computer
* has for this dive. Note that it can differ from "duration"
* if there are surface events in the middle.
*
* Still, we do ignore all but the last surface samples from the
* end, because some divecomputers just generate lots of them.
*/
static inline int dc_totaltime(const struct divecomputer *dc)
{
int time = dc->duration.seconds;
for (auto it = dc->samples.rbegin(); it != dc->samples.rend(); ++it) {
time = it->time.seconds;
if (it->depth.mm >= SURFACE_THRESHOLD)
break;
}
return time;
}
/*
* The end of a dive is actually not trivial, because "duration"
* is not the duration until the end, but the time we spend under
* water, which can be very different if there are surface events
* during the dive.
*
* So walk the dive computers, looking for the longest actual
* time in the samples (and just default to the dive duration if
* there are no samples).
*/
static inline int dive_totaltime(const struct dive *dive)
{
int time = dive->duration.seconds;
const struct divecomputer *dc;
for_each_relevant_dc(dive, dc) {
int dc_time = dc_totaltime(dc);
if (dc_time > time)
time = dc_time;
}
return time;
}
timestamp_t dive_endtime(const struct dive *dive)
{
return dive->when + dive_totaltime(dive);
}
bool time_during_dive_with_offset(const struct dive *dive, timestamp_t when, timestamp_t offset)
{
timestamp_t start = dive->when;
timestamp_t end = dive_endtime(dive);
return start - offset <= when && when <= end + offset;
}
/* this sets a usually unused copy of the preferences with the units
* that were active the last time the dive list was saved to git storage
* (this isn't used in XML files); storing the unit preferences in the
* data file is usually pointless (that's a setting of the software,
* not a property of the data), but it's a great hint of what the user
* might expect to see when creating a backend service that visualizes
* the dive list without Subsurface running - so this is basically a
* functionality for the core library that Subsurface itself doesn't
* use but that another consumer of the library (like an HTML exporter)
* will need */
void set_informational_units(const char *units)
{
if (strstr(units, "METRIC")) {
git_prefs.unit_system = METRIC;
} else if (strstr(units, "IMPERIAL")) {
git_prefs.unit_system = IMPERIAL;
} else if (strstr(units, "PERSONALIZE")) {
git_prefs.unit_system = PERSONALIZE;
if (strstr(units, "METERS"))
git_prefs.units.length = units::METERS;
if (strstr(units, "FEET"))
git_prefs.units.length = units::FEET;
if (strstr(units, "LITER"))
git_prefs.units.volume = units::LITER;
if (strstr(units, "CUFT"))
git_prefs.units.volume = units::CUFT;
if (strstr(units, "BAR"))
git_prefs.units.pressure = units::BAR;
if (strstr(units, "PSI"))
git_prefs.units.pressure = units::PSI;
if (strstr(units, "CELSIUS"))
git_prefs.units.temperature = units::CELSIUS;
if (strstr(units, "FAHRENHEIT"))
git_prefs.units.temperature = units::FAHRENHEIT;
if (strstr(units, "KG"))
git_prefs.units.weight = units::KG;
if (strstr(units, "LBS"))
git_prefs.units.weight = units::LBS;
if (strstr(units, "SECONDS"))
git_prefs.units.vertical_speed_time = units::SECONDS;
if (strstr(units, "MINUTES"))
git_prefs.units.vertical_speed_time = units::MINUTES;
}
}
void set_git_prefs(const char *prefs)
{
if (strstr(prefs, "TANKBAR"))
git_prefs.tankbar = 1;
if (strstr(prefs, "SHOW_SETPOINT"))
git_prefs.show_ccr_setpoint = 1;
if (strstr(prefs, "SHOW_SENSORS"))
git_prefs.show_ccr_sensors = 1;
if (strstr(prefs, "PO2_GRAPH"))
git_prefs.pp_graphs.po2 = 1;
}
/* clones a dive and moves given dive computer to front */
struct dive *make_first_dc(const struct dive *d, int dc_number)
{
struct divecomputer *dc, *newdc, *old_dc;
/* copy the dive */
dive *res = new dive;
copy_dive(d, res);
/* make a new unique id, since we still can't handle two equal ids */
res->id = dive_getUniqID();
if (dc_number == 0)
return res;
dc = &res->dc;
newdc = (divecomputer *)malloc(sizeof(*newdc));
old_dc = get_dive_dc(res, dc_number);
/* skip the current DC in the linked list */
for (dc = &res->dc; dc && dc->next != old_dc; dc = dc->next)
;
if (!dc) {
free(newdc);
report_info("data inconsistent: can't find the current DC");
return res;
}
dc->next = old_dc->next;
*newdc = res->dc;
res->dc = *old_dc;
res->dc.next = newdc;
free(old_dc);
return res;
}
static void delete_divecomputer(struct dive *d, int num)
{
int i;
/* Refuse to delete the last dive computer */
if (!d->dc.next)
return;
if (num == 0) {
/* During our move to C++, copy the divecomputer instead of moving the internals.
* Yes, this is "inefficient", but I don't care. Will be removed anyways. */
struct divecomputer *fdc = d->dc.next;
d->dc = *fdc;
delete fdc;
} else {
struct divecomputer *pdc = &d->dc;
for (i = 0; i < num - 1 && pdc; i++)
pdc = pdc->next;
if (pdc && pdc->next) {
struct divecomputer *dc = pdc->next;
pdc->next = dc->next;
delete dc;
}
}
}
/* Clone a dive and delete goven dive computer */
struct dive *clone_delete_divecomputer(const struct dive *d, int dc_number)
{
/* copy the dive */
dive *res = new dive;
copy_dive(d, res);
/* make a new unique id, since we still can't handle two equal ids */
res->id = dive_getUniqID();
delete_divecomputer(res, dc_number);
force_fixup_dive(res);
return res;
}
/*
* This splits the dive src by dive computer. The first output dive has all
* dive computers except num, the second only dive computer num.
* The dives will not be associated with a trip.
* On error, both output parameters are set to NULL.
*/
void split_divecomputer(const struct dive *src, int num, struct dive **out1, struct dive **out2)
{
const struct divecomputer *srcdc = get_dive_dc_const(src, num);
if (src && srcdc) {
// Copy the dive, but only using the selected dive computer
*out2 = new dive;
copy_dive_onedc(src, srcdc, *out2);
// This will also make fixup_dive() to allocate a new dive id...
(*out2)->id = 0;
fixup_dive(*out2);
// Copy the dive with all dive computers
*out1 = create_new_copy(src);
// .. and then delete the split-out dive computer
delete_divecomputer(*out1, num);
(*out1)->divetrip = (*out2)->divetrip = NULL;
} else {
*out1 = *out2 = NULL;
}
}
//Calculate O2 in best mix
fraction_t best_o2(depth_t depth, const struct dive *dive, bool in_planner)
{
fraction_t fo2;
int po2 = in_planner ? prefs.bottompo2 : (int)(prefs.modpO2 * 1000.0);
fo2.permille = (po2 * 100 / depth_to_mbar(depth.mm, dive)) * 10; //use integer arithmetic to round down to nearest percent
// Don't permit >100% O2
if (fo2.permille > 1000)
fo2.permille = 1000;
return fo2;
}
//Calculate He in best mix. O2 is considered narcopic
fraction_t best_he(depth_t depth, const struct dive *dive, bool o2narcotic, fraction_t fo2)
{
fraction_t fhe;
int pnarcotic, ambient;
pnarcotic = depth_to_mbar(prefs.bestmixend.mm, dive);
ambient = depth_to_mbar(depth.mm, dive);
if (o2narcotic) {
fhe.permille = (100 - 100 * pnarcotic / ambient) * 10; //use integer arithmetic to round up to nearest percent
} else {
fhe.permille = 1000 - fo2.permille - N2_IN_AIR * pnarcotic / ambient;
}
if (fhe.permille < 0)
fhe.permille = 0;
return fhe;
}
void invalidate_dive_cache(struct dive *dive)
{
memset(dive->git_id, 0, 20);
}
bool dive_cache_is_valid(const struct dive *dive)
{
static const unsigned char null_id[20] = { 0, };
return !!memcmp(dive->git_id, null_id, 20);
}
int get_surface_pressure_in_mbar(const struct dive *dive, bool non_null)
{
int mbar = dive->surface_pressure.mbar;
if (!mbar && non_null)
mbar = SURFACE_PRESSURE;
return mbar;
}
/* This returns the conversion factor that you need to multiply
* a (relative) depth in mm to obtain a (relative) pressure in mbar.
* As everywhere in Subsurface, the expected unit of a salinity is
* g/10l such that sea water has a salinity of 10300
*/
static double salinity_to_specific_weight(int salinity)
{
return salinity * 0.981 / 100000.0;
}
/* Pa = N/m^2 - so we determine the weight (in N) of the mass of 10m
* of water (and use standard salt water at 1.03kg per liter if we don't know salinity)
* and add that to the surface pressure (or to 1013 if that's unknown) */
static double calculate_depth_to_mbarf(int depth, pressure_t surface_pressure, int salinity)
{
double specific_weight;
int mbar = surface_pressure.mbar;
if (!mbar)
mbar = SURFACE_PRESSURE;
if (!salinity)
salinity = SEAWATER_SALINITY;
if (salinity < 500)
salinity += FRESHWATER_SALINITY;
specific_weight = salinity_to_specific_weight(salinity);
return mbar + depth * specific_weight;
}
int depth_to_mbar(int depth, const struct dive *dive)
{
return lrint(depth_to_mbarf(depth, dive));
}
double depth_to_mbarf(int depth, const struct dive *dive)
{
// For downloaded and planned dives, use DC's values
int salinity = dive->dc.salinity;
pressure_t surface_pressure = dive->dc.surface_pressure;
if (is_dc_manually_added_dive(&dive->dc)) { // For manual dives, salinity and pressure in another place...
surface_pressure = dive->surface_pressure;
salinity = dive->user_salinity;
}
return calculate_depth_to_mbarf(depth, surface_pressure, salinity);
}
double depth_to_bar(int depth, const struct dive *dive)
{
return depth_to_mbar(depth, dive) / 1000.0;
}
double depth_to_atm(int depth, const struct dive *dive)
{
return mbar_to_atm(depth_to_mbar(depth, dive));
}
/* for the inverse calculation we use just the relative pressure
* (that's the one that some dive computers like the Uemis Zurich
* provide - for the other models that do this libdivecomputer has to
* take care of this, but the Uemis we support natively */
int rel_mbar_to_depth(int mbar, const struct dive *dive)
{
// For downloaded and planned dives, use DC's salinity. Manual dives, use user's salinity
int salinity = is_dc_manually_added_dive(&dive->dc) ? dive->user_salinity : dive->dc.salinity;
if (!salinity)
salinity = SEAWATER_SALINITY;
/* whole mbar gives us cm precision */
double specific_weight = salinity_to_specific_weight(salinity);
return (int)lrint(mbar / specific_weight);
}
int mbar_to_depth(int mbar, const struct dive *dive)
{
// For downloaded and planned dives, use DC's pressure. Manual dives, use user's pressure
pressure_t surface_pressure = is_dc_manually_added_dive(&dive->dc)
? dive->surface_pressure
: dive->dc.surface_pressure;
if (!surface_pressure.mbar)
surface_pressure.mbar = SURFACE_PRESSURE;
return rel_mbar_to_depth(mbar - surface_pressure.mbar, dive);
}
/* MOD rounded to multiples of roundto mm */
depth_t gas_mod(struct gasmix mix, pressure_t po2_limit, const struct dive *dive, int roundto)
{
depth_t rounded_depth;
double depth = (double) mbar_to_depth(po2_limit.mbar * 1000 / get_o2(mix), dive);
rounded_depth.mm = (int)lrint(depth / roundto) * roundto;
return rounded_depth;
}
/* Maximum narcotic depth rounded to multiples of roundto mm */
depth_t gas_mnd(struct gasmix mix, depth_t end, const struct dive *dive, int roundto)
{
depth_t rounded_depth;
pressure_t ppo2n2;
ppo2n2.mbar = depth_to_mbar(end.mm, dive);
int maxambient = prefs.o2narcotic ?
(int)lrint(ppo2n2.mbar / (1 - get_he(mix) / 1000.0))
:
get_n2(mix) > 0 ?
(int)lrint(ppo2n2.mbar * N2_IN_AIR / get_n2(mix))
:
// Actually: Infinity
1000000;
rounded_depth.mm = (int)lrint(((double)mbar_to_depth(maxambient, dive)) / roundto) * roundto;
return rounded_depth;
}
struct dive *get_dive(int nr)
{
if (nr >= divelog.dives->nr || nr < 0)
return NULL;
return divelog.dives->dives[nr];
}
struct dive_site *get_dive_site_for_dive(const struct dive *dive)
{
return dive->dive_site;
}
std::string get_dive_country(const struct dive *dive)
{
struct dive_site *ds = dive->dive_site;
return ds ? taxonomy_get_country(ds->taxonomy) : std::string();
}
std::string get_dive_location(const struct dive *dive)
{
const struct dive_site *ds = dive->dive_site;
return ds ? ds->name : std::string();
}
unsigned int number_of_computers(const struct dive *dive)
{
unsigned int total_number = 0;
const struct divecomputer *dc = &dive->dc;
if (!dive)
return 1;
do {
total_number++;
dc = dc->next;
} while (dc);
return total_number;
}
struct divecomputer *get_dive_dc(struct dive *dive, int nr)
{
struct divecomputer *dc;
if (!dive)
return NULL;
dc = &dive->dc;
while (nr-- > 0) {
dc = dc->next;
if (!dc)
return &dive->dc;
}
return dc;
}
const struct divecomputer *get_dive_dc_const(const struct dive *dive, int nr)
{
return get_dive_dc((struct dive *)dive, nr);
}
struct dive *get_dive_by_uniq_id(int id)
{
int i;
struct dive *dive = NULL;
for_each_dive (i, dive) {
if (dive->id == id)
break;
}
#ifdef DEBUG
if (dive == NULL) {
report_info("Invalid id %x passed to get_dive_by_diveid, try to fix the code", id);
exit(1);
}
#endif
return dive;
}
int get_idx_by_uniq_id(int id)
{
int i;
struct dive *dive = NULL;
for_each_dive (i, dive) {
if (dive->id == id)
break;
}
#ifdef DEBUG
if (dive == NULL) {
report_info("Invalid id %x passed to get_dive_by_diveid, try to fix the code", id);
exit(1);
}
#endif
return i;
}
bool dive_site_has_gps_location(const struct dive_site *ds)
{
return ds && has_location(&ds->location);
}
int dive_has_gps_location(const struct dive *dive)
{
if (!dive)
return false;
return dive_site_has_gps_location(dive->dive_site);
}
/* Extract GPS location of a dive computer stored in the GPS1
* or GPS2 extra data fields */
static location_t dc_get_gps_location(const struct divecomputer *dc)
{
location_t res;
for (const auto &data: dc->extra_data) {
if (data.key == "GPS1") {
parse_location(data.value.c_str(), &res);
/* If we found a valid GPS1 field exit early since
* it has priority over GPS2 */
if (has_location(&res))
break;
} else if (data.key == "GPS2") {
/* For GPS2 fields continue searching, as we might
* still find a GPS1 field */
parse_location(data.value.c_str(), &res);
}
}
return res;
}
/* Get GPS location for a dive. Highest priority is given to the GPS1
* extra data written by libdivecomputer, as this comes from a real GPS
* device. If that doesn't exits, use the currently set dive site.
* This function is potentially slow, therefore only call sparingly
* and remember the result.
*/
location_t dive_get_gps_location(const struct dive *d)
{
location_t res = { };
for (const struct divecomputer *dc = &d->dc; dc; dc = dc->next) {
res = dc_get_gps_location(dc);
if (has_location(&res))
return res;
}
/* No libdivecomputer generated GPS data found.
* Let's use the location of the current dive site.
*/
if (d->dive_site)
res = d->dive_site->location;
return res;
}
gasmix_loop::gasmix_loop(const struct dive &d, const struct divecomputer &dc) :
dive(d), dc(dc), last(gasmix_air), loop("gaschange")
{
/* if there is no cylinder, return air */
if (dive.cylinders.nr <= 0)
return;
/* on first invocation, get initial gas mix and first event (if any) */
int cyl = explicit_first_cylinder(&dive, &dc);
last = get_cylinder(&dive, cyl)->gasmix;
ev = loop.next(dc);
}
gasmix gasmix_loop::next(int time)
{
/* if there is no cylinder, return air */
if (dive.cylinders.nr <= 0)
return last;
while (ev && ev->time.seconds <= time) {
last = get_gasmix_from_event(&dive, *ev);
ev = loop.next(dc);
}
return last;
}
/* get the gas at a certain time during the dive */
/* If there is a gasswitch at that time, it returns the new gasmix */
struct gasmix get_gasmix_at_time(const struct dive &d, const struct divecomputer &dc, duration_t time)
{
return gasmix_loop(d, dc).next(time.seconds);
}
/* Does that cylinder have any pressure readings? */
bool cylinder_with_sensor_sample(const struct dive *dive, int cylinder_id)
{
for (const struct divecomputer *dc = &dive->dc; dc; dc = dc->next) {
for (const auto &sample: dc->samples) {
for (int j = 0; j < MAX_SENSORS; ++j) {
if (!sample.pressure[j].mbar)
continue;
if (sample.sensor[j] == cylinder_id)
return true;
}
}
}
return false;
}