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

Use SCHED_FIFO for controller_manager's main thread #719

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 20, 2023

Conversation

fmauch
Copy link
Collaborator

@fmauch fmauch commented Jun 20, 2023

Previous investigations showed that using FIFO scheduling helps keeping cycle times also non non-RT kernels. This combined with non-blocking read can result in a very stable system.

This is, in fact, very close to what the actual controller_manager_node does except that we always use FIFO scheduling independent of the actual kernel in use.

Previous investigations showed that using FIFO scheduling helps keeping
cycle times also non non-RT kernels. This combined with non-blocking read
can result in a very stable system.

This is, in fact, very close to what the actual controller_manager_node
does except that we always use FIFO scheduling independent of the actual
kernel in use.
Copy link
Collaborator

@RobertWilbrandt RobertWilbrandt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me. With most of the code the same as ros2_control_node from controller_manager, we should maybe look at some point if we really need our own controller manager node.

@fmauch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fmauch commented Jun 20, 2023

This looks good to me. With most of the code the same as ros2_control_node from controller_manager, we should maybe look at some point if we really need our own controller manager node.

Yes, I'll try to push FIFO scheduling into controller_manager, but I wanted to have it running here, before.

@fmauch fmauch merged commit 39b61b5 into UniversalRobots:main Jun 20, 2023
7 of 11 checks passed
@fmauch fmauch deleted the fifo_scheduling branch June 20, 2023 22:26
@fmauch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fmauch commented Jun 21, 2023

@Mergifyio backport humble

@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Jun 21, 2023

backport humble

✅ Backports have been created

mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2023
Previous investigations showed that using FIFO scheduling helps keeping
cycle times also non non-RT kernels. This combined with non-blocking read
can result in a very stable system.

This is, in fact, very close to what the actual controller_manager_node
does except that we always use FIFO scheduling independent of the actual
kernel in use.

(cherry picked from commit 39b61b5)
fmauch added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2023
Previous investigations showed that using FIFO scheduling helps keeping
cycle times also non non-RT kernels. This combined with non-blocking read
can result in a very stable system.

This is, in fact, very close to what the actual controller_manager_node
does except that we always use FIFO scheduling independent of the actual
kernel in use.

(cherry picked from commit 39b61b5)

Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <exner@fzi.de>
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.

None yet

2 participants