Forward sdf ros remappings to loaded controllers

[jonatanolofsson]

Currently, the loaded controllers do not receive the remappings and namespace info from the sdf. This commit adds this information to the generated argument list so that they are forwarded to subsequently started nodes.

[ahcorde]

This will allow the following

<plugin>
  <namespace></namespace>
  <remapping></remapping>
  ...
</plugin>

and

<plugin>
  <ros>
    <namespace></namespace>
    <remapping></remapping>
    ...
 </ros>
</plugin>

I think we should only go with the second option

[jonatanolofsson]

Hi, and thanks. The behavior mirrors that of gazebo_ros node.cpp, which is the file that reads the xml structure currently. While I agree a single standard would be better, this follows the current behaviour more closely (although it might be an unintended feature) Best Regards, Jonatan

…

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021, 19:59 Alejandro Hernández Cordero, < ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** requested changes on this pull request. ------------------------------ In gazebo_ros2_control/src/gazebo_ros2_control_plugin.cpp <#80 (comment)> : > @@ -200,6 +200,35 @@ void GazeboRosControlPlugin::Load(gazebo::physics::ModelPtr parent, sdf::Element // So we have to parse the plugin file manually and set it to the node's context. auto rcl_context = impl_->model_nh_->get_node_base_interface()->get_context()->get_rcl_context(); std::vector<std::string> arguments = {"--ros-args", "--params-file", impl_->param_file_.c_str()}; + if (sdf->HasElement("ros")) { + sdf = sdf->GetElement("ros"); + } This will allow the following <plugin> <namespace></namespace> <remapping></remapping> ... </plugin> and <plugin> <ros> <namespace></namespace> <remapping></remapping> ... </ros> </plugin> I think we should only go with the second option — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#80 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABQOYS2JO7YONQPABZEIGDTSJFJRANCNFSM46PLRLZA> .

[jonatanolofsson]

But yes, I could support either way On Fri, 11 Jun 2021, 20:13 Jonatan Olofsson, ***@***.***> wrote:

…

Hi, and thanks. The behavior mirrors that of gazebo_ros node.cpp, which is the file that reads the xml structure currently. While I agree a single standard would be better, this follows the current behaviour more closely (although it might be an unintended feature) Best Regards, Jonatan On Fri, 11 Jun 2021, 19:59 Alejandro Hernández Cordero, < ***@***.***> wrote: > ***@***.**** requested changes on this pull request. > ------------------------------ > > In gazebo_ros2_control/src/gazebo_ros2_control_plugin.cpp > <#80 (comment)> > : > > > @@ -200,6 +200,35 @@ void GazeboRosControlPlugin::Load(gazebo::physics::ModelPtr parent, sdf::Element > // So we have to parse the plugin file manually and set it to the node's context. > auto rcl_context = impl_->model_nh_->get_node_base_interface()->get_context()->get_rcl_context(); > std::vector<std::string> arguments = {"--ros-args", "--params-file", impl_->param_file_.c_str()}; > + if (sdf->HasElement("ros")) { > + sdf = sdf->GetElement("ros"); > + } > > This will allow the following > > <plugin> > <namespace></namespace> > <remapping></remapping> > ... > </plugin> > > and > > <plugin> > <ros> > <namespace></namespace> > <remapping></remapping> > ... > </ros> > </plugin> > > I think we should only go with the second option > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#80 (review)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABQOYS2JO7YONQPABZEIGDTSJFJRANCNFSM46PLRLZA> > . >

[jonatanolofsson]

@ahcorde Could you please advice if I should update the PR or not, based on the argument above?

[ahcorde]

@jonatanolofsson yes, please I would prefer to update the PR

[jonatanolofsson]

@ahcorde Done!

[cco-seasony]

Hi @jonatanolofsson ,
I am trying to test this feature but for some reason things are not loading correctly.
When testing the namespace tag this is what I am encountering:

• I can load the plugin under the given namespace. I can see the services have the correct names.
• When trying to call ros2 control load_start_controller velocity_controller to start the velocity controller it does not work since that cmd is trying to use the service /controller_manager/load_and_start_controller which it does not exist since the namespace is prefixed to all the services. Hence, /<namespace>/controller_manager/load_and_start_controller is the one that this cmdros2 control load_start_controller velocity_controller should be calling.

I can manually call the service ros2 service call /<namespace>/controller_manager/load_and_start_controller controller_manager_msgs/srv/LoadStartController "{name: velocity_controller}" and it works fine. This loads the controller and creates the command topic under the same namespace.
I was wondering if this is the right way to do it or am I doing something wrong along the way?

Thanks in advance for the help.
Kind regards,
Carlos

[jonatanolofsson]

@cco-seasony If you're using spawner.py, you can use the -c parameter to change which controller_manager it talks to. There might be a similar (same?) parameter for the ros2 control interface