Conversation
…veit#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
* Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de>
ea4d332 to
7a7fd55
Compare
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3283 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 45.60% 45.58% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 716 716
Lines 62388 62375 -13
Branches 7547 7545 -2
==========================================
- Hits 28446 28428 -18
- Misses 33776 33779 +3
- Partials 166 168 +2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Looks like another sporadic test failure |
Yeah, it's pretty bad lately. I tried looking at this briefly this weekend but on my machine, even the most basic Pilz unit test always exits with an error due to bad memory freeing of shared pointers. |
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai> (cherry picked from commit ba35aaa) # Conflicts: # moveit_ros/move_group/src/default_capabilities/execute_trajectory_action_capability.cpp # moveit_ros/planning/planning_scene_monitor/include/moveit/planning_scene_monitor/planning_scene_monitor.hpp # moveit_ros/planning/planning_scene_monitor/src/planning_scene_monitor.cpp
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai> (cherry picked from commit ba35aaa)
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> (cherry picked from commit ba35aaa) Co-authored-by: Mark Johnson <104826595+rr-mark@users.noreply.github.com>
* Ports moveit #3676 and #3682 (#3283) * Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai> (cherry picked from commit ba35aaa) # Conflicts: # moveit_ros/move_group/src/default_capabilities/execute_trajectory_action_capability.cpp # moveit_ros/planning/planning_scene_monitor/include/moveit/planning_scene_monitor/planning_scene_monitor.hpp # moveit_ros/planning/planning_scene_monitor/src/planning_scene_monitor.cpp * Resolves merge conflicts. (#3322) * Resolves merge conflicts. * Undoes erroneous auto-format. * Undoes erroneous auto-format. --------- Co-authored-by: Mark Johnson <104826595+rr-mark@users.noreply.github.com>
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (moveit#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (moveit#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai>
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (moveit#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (moveit#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai>
* Use separate callback queue + spinner for ExecuteTrajectoryAction (moveit#3676) This allows parallel execution + planning. Also required modifying updateSceneWithCurrentState() to allow skipping a scene update with a new robot state (from CurrentStateMonitor), if the planning scene is currently locked (due to planning). Otherwise, the CurrentStateMonitor would block too. Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> * PSM: simplify state_update_pending_ (moveit#3682) * Move update of state_update_pending_ to updateSceneWithCurrentState() * Revert to try_lock While there are a few other locks except explicit user locks (getPlanningSceneServiceCallback(), collisionObjectCallback(), attachObjectCallback(), newPlanningSceneCallback(), and scenePublishingThread()), these occur rather seldom (scenePublishingThread() publishes at 2Hz). Hence, we might indeed balance a non-blocking CSM vs. missed PS updates in favour of CSM. * Don't block for scene update from stateUpdateTimerCallback too The timer callback and CSM's state update callbacks are served from the same callback queue, which would block CSM again. * further locking adaptations reading dt_state_update_ and last_robot_state_update_wall_time_ does not lead to logic errors, but at most to a skipped or redundant update on corrupted data. Alternatively we could be on the safe side and turn both variables into std::atomic, but that would effectively mean locks on every read. Instead, only set state_update_pending_ as an atomic, which is lockfree in this case. Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> * Ports changes to ROS2. --------- Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> Co-authored-by: Robert Haschke <rhaschke@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Michael Görner <me@v4hn.de> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sebastian Jahr <sebastian.jahr@picknik.ai>
Description
Checklist