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

[HW Interface] Command-/SystemInterface export via description. Handles store value instead of pointers #952

Conversation

mamueluth
Copy link
Member

This PR should serve as foundation for discussion and is still work in progress. Concept has been tested and works, however there is still some stuff that needs adjustment (tests, some controllers...).

What has been done:

Export of command and state interfaces:

  • A description of the command/state interfaces is exported instead of an actual object.
  • Default implementation provided for this. Hardware can override if needed.
  • No need for user to manage shared memory and pass by raw pointer.
  • Set handle values via loans assigned by resource-manager->system->system interface.
  • Provide default implementation for import of loans. Hardware can override if needed.
  • Default implementation for access of the handle from hardware side.

Handles:

  • Handles are adjusted accordingly. Value is now stored directly in handle, not raw pointers are passed around.
  • New functionality in Handles which gives user ability to check if read value is: new and valid.

What needs to be done:

  • Adjust some tests

@destogl destogl changed the title Command-/SystemInterface export via description. Handles store value instad of pointers [WIP] [HW Interface] Command-/SystemInterface export via description. Handles store value instead of pointers [WIP] Apr 20, 2023
@destogl destogl changed the title [HW Interface] Command-/SystemInterface export via description. Handles store value instead of pointers [WIP] [HW Interface] Command-/SystemInterface export via description. Handles store value instead of pointers Apr 20, 2023
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented May 17, 2023

This pull request is in conflict. Could you fix it @mamueluth?

@mamueluth mamueluth force-pushed the refactor_interface_export branch from 66ff75e to 3526deb Compare November 15, 2023 10:24
pac48 pushed a commit to pac48/ros2_control that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2024
@destogl
Copy link
Member

destogl commented Mar 11, 2024

closing in favor of #1240

@destogl
Copy link
Member

destogl commented Apr 1, 2024

Obsolete and replaced by #1240

@destogl destogl closed this Apr 1, 2024
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants