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

Linting and header cleanup, part 1 #752

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 10, 2022
Merged

Linting and header cleanup, part 1 #752

merged 3 commits into from
May 10, 2022

Conversation

ayrton04
Copy link
Collaborator

@ayrton04 ayrton04 commented May 9, 2022

Draft PR for now. Just want the build farm to test this. I have more commits a-comin'.

@ayrton04 ayrton04 closed this May 9, 2022
@ayrton04 ayrton04 reopened this May 9, 2022
@ayrton04 ayrton04 closed this May 10, 2022
@ayrton04 ayrton04 reopened this May 10, 2022
@ayrton04
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The random UKF test failures are odd. It passes every time locally. When it fails on the build farm now, it's always as if it's not getting any of the sensor measurements:

[test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces-2] /tmp/ws/src/robot_localization/test/test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces.cpp:309: Failure
[test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces-2] Expected: (::fabs(filtered_.pose.pose.position.x - pose.pose.pose.position.x)) < (0.1), actual: 20 vs 0.1
[test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces-2] /tmp/ws/src/robot_localization/test/test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces.cpp:315: Failure
[test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces-2] Expected: (::fabs(filtered_.pose.pose.position.z - pose.pose.pose.position.z)) < (0.1), actual: 40 vs 0.1
[ukf_node-1] [INFO] [1652184610.335751570] [test_ukf_localization_node_interfaces_ukf]: Received a request to reset filter.

EXPECT_LT(
::fabs(filtered_.pose.pose.position.x - pose.pose.pose.position.x),
0.1);
EXPECT_LT(
::fabs(filtered_.pose.pose.position.y),
0.1); // Configuration for this variable for this sensor is false
EXPECT_LT(
::fabs(filtered_.pose.pose.position.z - pose.pose.pose.position.z),
0.1);

The only way we have that error at the end is if:

  • The node wasn't receiving the sensor data
  • The node wasn't publishing the filtered output
  • The test sub wasn't receiving the filtered output

Does anyone know if ROS 2 has ever shown instability in pub and subs being correctly established? It seems unlikely, but maybe it's come up before.

@ayrton04
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I think I have a handle on why that's happening. Will address in a forthcoming PR.

@ayrton04 ayrton04 marked this pull request as ready for review May 10, 2022 16:56
@ayrton04 ayrton04 merged commit bbe57d4 into ros2 May 10, 2022
@ayrton04 ayrton04 deleted the cpplint branch May 10, 2022 16:56
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