Improve watch reconnect handling on GrapheneOS

[and1mon]

Summary

This changes reconnect handling so the app no longer depends primarily on CDM/CompanionDevice presence events to reconnect to a previously paired watch.

On GrapheneOS, the initial pairing/connection worked, but later reconnect attempts after a watch-side disconnect were often not detected unless the watch was paired again. The root issue appeared to be that the app was not reliably receiving a fresh reconnect trigger from the OS.

What changed

• Added a ReconnectManager to centralize reconnect state and policy
• Use CDM presence as one reconnect trigger, but not the only one
• Start BLE scan fallback for known watches when appropriate
• Re-open a reconnect retry window after disconnect / connection failure
• Stop duplicate connection attempts for the same device appearance
• Preserve locally known device addresses when CDM associations are temporarily missing
• Require BLUETOOTH_SCAN for the scan fallback path on Android 12+

Why

The reconnect itself was able to succeed once started. The failure mode was that, after a disconnect, the app often did not notice a later reconnect attempt from the watch on GrapheneOS.

This PR makes reconnect detection more app-driven and less dependent on ROM-specific CDM behavior.

[izivkov]

Thanks Andre. Is this working reliably for you now? I'll take a look at the pull request carefully, but looks like the retry logic is adding a lot of complexity. I use AI in my work quite a bit, but it's quite easy to lose track of it, if you let it go unchecked. I still prefer to find the "smoking gun" instead of just retrying. I'll look at the logs you sent me. The extra permission in the code BLUETOOTH_SCAN was indeed needed and I had it already added in my last APK. I'll get back to you with my findings. Regards

…

On Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 1:06 PM sonarqubecloud[bot] ***@***.***> wrote: *sonarqubecloud[bot]* left a comment (izivkov/CasioGShockSmartSync#148) <#148?email_source=notifications&email_token=AA7M37U6EG6CI3NW3UABBE34XJESVA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTIMZQGYZTANZXHAZKM4TFMFZW63VKON2WE43DOJUWEZLEUVSXMZLOOS2XA4S7MNXW23LFNZ2F633QMVXF6Y3MNFRWW#issuecomment-4306307782> [image: Quality Gate Passed] <https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148> *Quality Gate passed* Issues <https://camo.githubusercontent.com/6cc27951a82703bd6a32deed62ec92af84fc495762ca86bc7af5a3ac490c7bda/68747470733a2f2f736f6e6172736f757263652e6769746875622e696f2f736f6e6172636c6f75642d6769746875622d7374617469632d7265736f75726365732f76322f636f6d6d6f6e2f7061737365642d313670782e706e67> 3 New issues <https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148&issueStatuses=OPEN,CONFIRMED&sinceLeakPeriod=true> <https://camo.githubusercontent.com/5ad34d7e6f2a5aa0d644209f46bb24fba00f31f704923ce46fe8434f94917f73/68747470733a2f2f736f6e6172736f757263652e6769746875622e696f2f736f6e6172636c6f75642d6769746875622d7374617469632d7265736f75726365732f76322f636f6d6d6f6e2f61636365707465642d313670782e706e67> 0 Accepted issues <https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148&issueStatuses=ACCEPTED> Measures <https://camo.githubusercontent.com/6cc27951a82703bd6a32deed62ec92af84fc495762ca86bc7af5a3ac490c7bda/68747470733a2f2f736f6e6172736f757263652e6769746875622e696f2f736f6e6172636c6f75642d6769746875622d7374617469632d7265736f75726365732f76322f636f6d6d6f6e2f7061737365642d313670782e706e67> 0 Security Hotspots <https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148&issueStatuses=OPEN,CONFIRMED&sinceLeakPeriod=true> <https://camo.githubusercontent.com/6cc27951a82703bd6a32deed62ec92af84fc495762ca86bc7af5a3ac490c7bda/68747470733a2f2f736f6e6172736f757263652e6769746875622e696f2f736f6e6172636c6f75642d6769746875622d7374617469632d7265736f75726365732f76322f636f6d6d6f6e2f7061737365642d313670782e706e67> 0.0% Coverage on New Code <https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148&metric=new_coverage&view=list> <https://camo.githubusercontent.com/6cc27951a82703bd6a32deed62ec92af84fc495762ca86bc7af5a3ac490c7bda/68747470733a2f2f736f6e6172736f757263652e6769746875622e696f2f736f6e6172636c6f75642d6769746875622d7374617469632d7265736f75726365732f76322f636f6d6d6f6e2f7061737365642d313670782e706e67> 0.0% Duplication on New Code <https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148&metric=new_duplicated_lines_density&view=list> See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud <https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=izivkov_CasioGShockSmartSync&pullRequest=148> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#148?email_source=notifications&email_token=AA7M37U6EG6CI3NW3UABBE34XJESVA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTIMZQGYZTANZXHAZKM4TFMFZW63VKON2WE43DOJUWEZLEUVSXMZLOOS2XA4S7MNXW23LFNZ2F633QMVXF6Y3MNFRWW#issuecomment-4306307782>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA7M37QTQ5KR6FUJRLKWIL34XJESVAVCNFSM6AAAAACYEDZHTGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DGMBWGMYDONZYGI> . Triage notifications, keep track of coding agent tasks and review pull requests on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/ios/AA7M37V52JTXUJKA4YRJRML4XJESVA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTIMZQGYZTANZXHAZKM4TFMFZW63VKON2WE43DOJUWEZLEUVSXMZLOOSVGM33PORSXEX3JN5ZQ> and Android <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/android/AA7M37WSTFGDEGV6LBSZ4KL4XJESVA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTIMZQGYZTANZXHAZKM4TFMFZW63VKON2WE43DOJUWEZLEUVSXMZLOOSXGM33PORSXEX3BNZSHE33JMQ>. Download it today! You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[and1mon]

Yeah I totally get that, it is a big change and I cannot reliably test it for all devices.

The retry logic is also not my preferred way of solving this, however so far it has been the only way I got it work.

There is no need to merge this as is, maybe it can help find a cleaner solution though.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
3 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[and1mon]

Slimmed down the PR to only include the necessary logic without a bigger refactor as before, so hopefully it's a bit better to read now for further analysis.

[izivkov]

@and1mon

So, you are right - the GrapheneOS is eating "onDeviceAppeared" events and we cannot rely on the CDM generated events alone. I have incorporated ideas from your Pull Request and other AI feedback into a branch grapheneos. Please check it out and try it. I'm pretty confident it will work on GrapheneOS. You can take a look at the release notes in this file on this branch: RELEASE_NOTES_GRAPHENEOS.md

Let me know how it goes,
Thanks