Fix #65: add au921, in866, as923jp variants

examples/raw-feather/raw-feather.ino

@@ -311,6 +311,64 @@ void setup() {
 
   // default tx power for US: 21 dBm
   LMIC.txpow = 21;
+#elif defined(CFG_au921)
+  // make it easier for test, by pull the parameters up to the top of the
+  // block. Ideally, we'd use the serial port to drive this; or have
+  // a voting protocol where one side is elected the controller and
+  // guides the responder through all the channels, powers, ramps
+  // the transmit power from min to max, and measures the RSSI and SNR.
+  // Even more amazing would be a scheme where the controller could
+  // handle multiple nodes; in that case we'd have a way to do
+  // production test and qualification. However, using an RWC5020A
+  // is a much better use of development time.
+
+  // set fDownlink true to use a downlink channel; false
+  // to use an uplink channel. Generally speaking, uplink
+  // is more interesting, because you can prove that gateways
+  // *should* be able to hear you.
+  const static bool fDownlink = false;
+
+  // the downlink channel to be used.
+  const static uint8_t kDownlinkChannel = 3;
+
+  // the uplink channel to be used.
+  const static uint8_t kUplinkChannel = 8 + 3;
+
+  // this is automatically set to the proper bandwidth in kHz,
+  // based on the selected channel.
+  uint32_t uBandwidth;
+
+  if (! fDownlink)
+	{
+	if (kUplinkChannel < 64)
+		{
+		LMIC.freq = AU921_125kHz_UPFBASE +
+			    kUplinkChannel * AU921_125kHz_UPFSTEP;
+		uBandwidth = 125;
+		}
+	else
+		{
+		LMIC.freq = AU921_500kHz_UPFBASE +
+			    (kUplinkChannel - 64) * AU921_500kHz_UPFSTEP;
+		uBandwidth = 500;
+		}
+	}
+  else
+	{
+	// downlink channel
+	LMIC.freq = AU921_500kHz_DNFBASE +
+		    kDownlinkChannel * AU921_500kHz_DNFSTEP;
+	uBandwidth = 500;
+	}
+
+  // Use a suitable spreading factor
+  if (uBandwidth < 500)
+        LMIC.datarate = AU921_DR_SF7;         // DR4
+  else
+        LMIC.datarate = AU921_DR_SF12CR;      // DR8
+
+  // default tx power for AU: 30 dBm
+  LMIC.txpow = 30;
 #elif defined(CFG_as923)
 // make it easier for test, by pull the parameters up to the top of the
 // block. Ideally, we'd use the serial port to drive this; or have
@@ -321,7 +379,7 @@ void setup() {
 // handle multiple nodes; in that case we'd have a way to do
 // production test and qualification. However, using an RWC5020A
 // is a much better use of development time.
-        const static uint8_t kChannel = 1;
+        const static uint8_t kChannel = 0;
         uint32_t uBandwidth;
 
         LMIC.freq = AS923_F1 + kChannel * 200000;
@@ -333,8 +391,33 @@ void setup() {
         else
                 LMIC.datarate = AS923_DR_SF7B;        // DR8
 
-        // default tx power for US: 21 dBm
+        // default tx power for AS: 21 dBm
         LMIC.txpow = 16;
+
+	if (LMIC_COUNTRY_CODE == LMIC_COUNTRY_CODE_JP)
+		{
+		LMIC.lbt_ticks = us2osticks(AS923JP_LBT_US);
+                LMIC.lbt_dbmax = AS923JP_LBT_DB_MAX;
+		}
+#elif defined(CFG_in866)
+// make it easier for test, by pull the parameters up to the top of the
+// block. Ideally, we'd use the serial port to drive this; or have
+// a voting protocol where one side is elected the controller and
+// guides the responder through all the channels, powers, ramps
+// the transmit power from min to max, and measures the RSSI and SNR.
+// Even more amazing would be a scheme where the controller could
+// handle multiple nodes; in that case we'd have a way to do
+// production test and qualification. However, using an RWC5020A
+// is a much better use of development time.
+        const static uint8_t kChannel = 0;
+        uint32_t uBandwidth;
+
+        LMIC.freq = IN866_F1 + kChannel * 200000;
+        uBandwidth = 125;
+
+	LMIC.datarate = IN866_DR_SF7;         // DR7
+        // default tx power for IN: 30 dBm
+        LMIC.txpow = IN866_TX_EIRP_MAX_DBM;
 #else
 # error Unsupported LMIC regional configuration.
 #endif