There's a bug with the rolling average

Not quite sure where though

components/dht22/Kconfig.projbuild

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ menu "DHT22"
 	depends on DHT22_ENABLED
 
     config DHT22_PERIOD_POLL
-        int "Period to poll the DHT22 in ms"
+        int "Period to poll the DHT22 in seconds"
 	default 2000
 	depends on DHT22_ENABLED
 endmenu

main/main.c

@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ void read_from_pms5003() {
     // TODO: actually collect some data
     ESP_LOGI(TAG, "Got PMS5003 data!");
     // TODO: Write the data out somewhere
-    vTaskDelay(pdMS_TO_TICKS(CONFIG_PMS5003_PERIOD_POLL));
+    vTaskDelay(pdMS_TO_TICKS(CONFIG_PMS5003_PERIOD_POLL * 1000));
   }
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_PMS5003_ENABLED */
@@ -82,8 +82,10 @@ void read_from_dht22() {
         // avoid some weird bugs (e.g. time changing from 1970 -> current time within
         // a 10 min period or just saving data saying it's from the 70s)
         /*
-         * Appears to be a bug when hitting num samples = 64
+There is a bug _somewhere_
-         * Here's a log:
+
+First log:
+
 W (327852) YASPAM: temperature: 19.500000 & relative humidity: 64.000000
 W (327852) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 195, num_samples: 62
 W (332862) YASPAM: temperature: 19.400000 & relative humidity: 64.100000
@@ -101,7 +103,7 @@ W (357912) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 35406, num_samples: 68
 W (362922) YASPAM: temperature: 19.400000 & relative humidity: 64.600000
 W (362922) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 35851, num_samples: 69
 
-Another log - suggesting it's not to do with 64:
+Another log:
 
 I (387992) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 74
 W (392992) YASPAM: temperature: 18.700000 & relative humidity: 69.900000
@@ -114,7 +116,60 @@ W (408022) YASPAM: temperature: 18.700000 & relative humidity: 69.800000
 I (408032) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 53805, num_samples: 78
 W (413032) YASPAM: temperature: 18.800000 & relative humidity: 69.600000
 
-Something overrunning and stomping on my bits?
+Another log where it corrected itself (decided to print the decitemp
+rather than float):
+
+I (22231) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (22231) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 188, num_samples: 1
+I (27241) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (27241) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 188, num_samples: 2
+I (32251) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (32251) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 188, num_samples: 3
+I (37261) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (37261) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 22033, num_samples: 4
+I (42271) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (42271) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 16571, num_samples: 5
+I (47281) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (47281) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 26401, num_samples: 6
+I (52291) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (52291) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 186, num_samples: 7
+I (57301) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (57301) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 186, num_samples: 8
+I (62311) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (62311) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 186, num_samples: 9
+
+I think someone might be stomping on my bits perhaps?
+
+There's potentially a bug with the average temp calculation (or storing)
+I (152421) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 187
+I (152421) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 27
+I (157431) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (157431) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 28
+I (162441) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 188
+I (162441) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 29
+... increase temperature for a while
+I (558231) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 246
+I (558231) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 108
+I (563241) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 245
+I (563241) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 109
+I (568241) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 244
+I (568241) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 110
+... no change in average
+I (618321) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 234
+I (618321) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 187, num_samples: 120
+W (618331) YASPAM: 10 minutes of samples collected. Average temp: 187
+I (623331) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 233
+I (623331) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 233, num_samples: 1
+I (628331) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 231
+I (628331) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 231, num_samples: 2
+I (633341) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 231
+I (633341) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 231, num_samples: 3
+I (638341) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 229
+I (638341) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 22075, num_samples: 4
+I (643351) YASPAM: latest_datapoint.temp: 228
+I (643351) YASPAM: ten_minute_average.temp: 16613, num_samples: 5
+
+^ Did capture 10 mins of samples though! And appears to reset correctly.
 
 */
 
@@ -126,7 +181,7 @@ Something overrunning and stomping on my bits?
               (latest_datapoint.rh - ten_minute_rolling_average.rh) /
               num_samples_last_ten_mins;
           ten_minute_rolling_average.temp +=
-              (latest_datapoint.temp - ten_minute_rolling_average.temp) /
+            (latest_datapoint.temp - ten_minute_rolling_aevrage.temp) /
               num_samples_last_ten_mins;
         }
         num_samples_last_ten_mins += 1;
@@ -136,7 +191,7 @@ Something overrunning and stomping on my bits?
         // This should be: if (10 minutes of sample taken)
         // TODO: check max samples / second that can fit in 10 minutes
         if (num_samples_last_ten_mins >=
-            ((uint32_t)CONFIG_DHT22_PERIOD_POLL * 1000 * 60 * 10)) {
+            ((10 * 60) / (CONFIG_DHT22_PERIOD_POLL))) {
           ESP_LOGW(TAG, "10 minutes of samples collected. Average temp: %i", ten_minute_rolling_average.temp);
           num_samples_last_ten_mins = 0;
 
@@ -162,7 +217,7 @@ Something overrunning and stomping on my bits?
         }
       }
     }
-    vTaskDelay(pdMS_TO_TICKS(CONFIG_DHT22_PERIOD_POLL));
+    vTaskDelay(pdMS_TO_TICKS(CONFIG_DHT22_PERIOD_POLL * 1000));
   }
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG DHT22_ENABLED */