Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ROS2] Watchdog trips on LoveLace during service calls #63

Closed
amalnanavati opened this issue Aug 31, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed

[ROS2] Watchdog trips on LoveLace during service calls #63

amalnanavati opened this issue Aug 31, 2023 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor

Sometimes on LoveLace, in the process of all the service calls in pre_moveto_config (i.e., toggle watchdog listener off, re-tare FT sensor, toggle watchdog listener on, and set FT thresholds) the watchdog trips because a watchdog message hasn't been received in 0.5 sec (or 0.1, depending on the parameter setting). However, the update function of that behavior is async, so it should not be blocking. This is something that is necessary to look into -- why sometimes watchdog messages are not received for a time period. It may be related to #62 , or to this article on deadlock.

Note that both LoveLace and Nano are using Cyclone DDS

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that this is not an issue on t0b1 + nano -- not sure what is going on with lovelace...

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

amalnanavati commented Aug 31, 2023

It is also worthwhile considering moving the setup function for the tree (in create_action_servers.py) to only run once when the tree is created, not at the beginning of every action call.

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

It is also worthwhile modifying the the service and action in py_trees_ros such that if the wait time is 0.0, it just checks whether the server is ready as opposed to waiting for it. (although then is there any point to that call? 🤷‍♂️)

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

#92 mostly addresses this, lingering issues will be documented there.

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

NOTE: The other thing (In addition to #92 ) that may have helped with this issue is lowering the face detection rate to 3Hz (in #91 ), because face detection eats up a lot of CPU power.

@amalnanavati
Copy link
Contributor Author

This issue has stopped occuring after #92 and #94 got merged in.

@amalnanavati amalnanavati self-assigned this Sep 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant