mirror of
https://github.com/Kpa-clawbot/meshcore-analyzer.git
synced 2026-04-25 18:52:08 +00:00
441409203e
## Problem Nodes with flaky RTC (firmware emitting interleaved good and nonsense timestamps) were classified as `no_clock` because the broken samples poisoned the recent median. Operators lost visibility into these nodes — they showed "No Clock" even though ~60% of their adverts had valid timestamps. Observed on staging: a node with 31K samples where recent adverts interleave good skew (-6.8s, -13.6s) with firmware nonsense (-56M, -60M seconds). Under the old logic, median of the mixed window → `no_clock`. ## Solution New `bimodal_clock` severity tier that surfaces flaky-RTC nodes with their real (good-sample) skew value. ### Classification order (first match wins) | Severity | Good Fraction | Description | |----------|--------------|-------------| | `no_clock` | < 10% | Essentially no real clock | | `bimodal_clock` | 10–80% (and bad > 0) | Mixed good/bad — flaky RTC | | `ok`/`warn`/`critical`/`absurd` | ≥ 80% | Normal classification | "Good" = `|skew| <= 1 hour`; "bad" = likely uninitialized RTC nonsense. When `bimodal_clock`, `recentMedianSkewSec` is computed from **good samples only**, so the dashboard shows the real working-clock value (e.g. -7s) instead of the broken median. ### Backend changes - New constant `BimodalSkewThresholdSec = 3600` - New severity `bimodal_clock` in classification logic - New API fields: `goodFraction`, `recentBadSampleCount`, `recentSampleCount` ### Frontend changes - Amber `Bimodal` badge with tooltip showing bad-sample percentage - Bimodal nodes render skew value like ok/warn/severe (not the "No Clock" path) - Warning line below sparkline: "⚠️ X of last Y adverts had nonsense timestamps (likely RTC reset)" ### Tests - 3 new Go unit tests: bimodal (60% good → bimodal_clock), all-bad (→ no_clock), 90%-good (→ ok) - 1 new frontend test: bimodal badge rendering with tooltip - Existing `TestReporterScenario_789` passes unchanged Builds on #789 (recent-window severity). Closes #845 --------- Co-authored-by: you <you@example.com>