PowerMax alarm binding: message CRC check failed

Add-ons Bindings
,
1

Hi folks, i’ve just added to new zones to my PowermaxPro alarm, and these are working just fine according to the alarm panel.
However, Openhab 1.8.1 is now throwing errors

@Lolodomo

2016-09-23 13:07:39.315 [WARN ] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - PowerMax alarm binding: message CRC check failed (expected FD, got BB, message 0DFD0A3CFD0A)
2016-09-23 13:07:39.322 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - Message length is now 7 but message is apparently not complete
2016-09-23 13:07:49.287 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.internal.PowerMaxBinding] - PowerMax alarm Execute
2016-09-23 13:07:49.316 [WARN ] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - PowerMax alarm binding: message CRC check failed (expected FD, got 77, message 0DFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A)
2016-09-23 13:07:49.322 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - Message length is now 10 but message is apparently not complete
2016-09-23 13:07:59.315 [WARN ] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - PowerMax alarm binding: message CRC check failed (expected FD, got 33, message 0DFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A)
2016-09-23 13:07:59.321 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - Message length is now 13 but message is apparently not complete
2016-09-23 13:08:09.290 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.internal.PowerMaxBinding] - PowerMax alarm Execute
2016-09-23 13:08:09.316 [WARN ] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - PowerMax alarm binding: message CRC check failed (expected FD, got EE, message 0DFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A3CFD0A)
2016-09-23 13:08:09.322 [DEBUG] [o.b.p.i.c.PowerMaxReaderThread] - Message length is now 16 but message is apparently not complete

any ideas?

Colin

2

I see no errors, only DEBUG and WARN.

Everytime 0A is seen in the message, it might be the end - or it might not. The binding tests the CRC and if it is duff, it waits on the next 0A and tries again (generating a warning).
http://www.domoticaforum.eu/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=6581

3

Yeah strange. The binding wouldn’t work though. A final ‘reboot the server one last time’ cured they problem.

Thanks for your response.

4

rossko57’s analysis was correct. I could add that this way to do is only for messages we don’t know the lengh. And this message was a message not handled by the binding.
But I can agree that a “warning” is a little too much in this case.