Issues & Pull Requests
Attendee count (max): 25
UTC2301 - Record number of PRs to get through
UTC2304 - Hardware flow control issues on ChibiOS
- Floating CTS pin would cause a DMA channel to block
- DMA channel shared with I2C
- Could cause compass not to appear, or possibly fail in flight
- Very important bugfix
- New beta required for Copter and Plane and Rover
- Waiting for Sid’s (or anybody else’s) review on the PR
- More likely to happen if HW flow control is forced on
- Amilcar has seen this on Rover
- Lots of bench-testing
- Forced conflicts between uart transmits by causing timeouts
- Testing appreciated
UTC2308 - Use CLOEXEC in more places
When combined with a pymavlink patch (ArduPilot/pymavlink#188), this allows the reboot command in SITL (and autotest, hopefully!) to work entirely.
- Maybe not be needed in all places
- Like here
- Further patches to make out behaviour uniform in the future
UTC2315 - AP_AHRS: AP_AHRS_DCM: do not use home altitude if it is not set
UTC2325 - Add ability to send extended-sys-state message
- Provides additional info to gcs to aircraft status, e.g. plane if in transition
- Requires careful review
- When should say landing phase in VTOL
- RTL Final descent vs landing
- Randy considers final-descent as landing
- Should add this to data stream?
- GCS should request message if handle it?
- Could get it in without data stream
- Not worried with bitrotting on this one
- This can go in once message-intervals is in
UTC2334 - AP_BattMonitor: support ESC telemetry for virtual battery
- Allows BLHeli ESC’s to report info to Ardupilot to replace Battery Monitor (ie: voltage, current)
- Tridge thinks the code is OK
- MdB thinks there’s an existing bug in the code
- Review dismissed and PR merged!
UTC2336 - Copter: change default streamrate for ADSB from 5 to 0
- Ping devices - one is passive one is active
- Tom agrees with the pull request
- If this is merged as-is some users will see regressions as if a GCS is relying on DATA_STREAM_ALL to set the stream rate it will fail
- Existing bug related to ADSB stream
- Can’t find adsb stream rate in Mission Planner
- Put on ice for now
UTC2349 - RFC - AP_UAVCAN: add redundancy feature to mute outputs
- What is this trying to solve?
- What types of failures is this trying to cope with?
- What failure modes does it introduce?
- If a CPU crashes, the other CPU should pop up and start sending outputs ¼ of a second later
- How do ESCs behave if you stop sending them messages for a little while?
- Some will go to their uninitialised state
- And then need to see 0% throttle before they will accept anything higher than that
- Meaning your vehicle would still crash…
- Autopilot on stm32 and on Linux?
- If you reboot Linux then the stm32 takes control…
- Two autopilots trying to fly the vehicle at the same time
- Crash checks would trigger if the non-actually-flying autopilot wasn’t in complete agreement with the primary
- NE: The second flight controller could be merely a loiter controller on a completely separate radio system.
- Is there any scenario in which this patch set would save a vehicle?
- Additional patches would be required to make AP aware that it was a backup so it didn’t do crash checks and the like
- This is a CAN-layer thing, rest of flight code is not currently aware
- NE: Should you focus on CAN ESC’s, or PWM ESC’s? I would initially propose PWM ESC’s because there are so many of them.
- Tridge thinks we should do things up at the vehicle level
- We need a google doc to design this
- This PR is acting as a great conversation-starter, but…
- Some sort of AP_Redundancy
- Some hooks in the flight code for it
- [10:03 AM] (Channel) MdB: param sync + tuning could bite you hard on that one
- [10:03 AM] (Channel) MdB: (ensuring the secondary control is armed/ready is an issue)
- Mavlink packet that can go over CAN?
- A pin?
- [10:04 AM] To Weekly devcall: pilot-monitoring may be a better idea, 'though.
- Rover might be a good place to start with this
- F103 doesn’t have sensors on it on PixHawk
- Two F4s and two F7s on a single board?
- Sensors, power buses etc etc needed
- And they need to be redundant or you’re missing the point
- Two boards may give you redundancy. One board will not
- Two processors fighting over vehicle
- Watchdog processor to switch?
- PR will be closed
UTC0010 - MAVLink-over-CAN virtual serial port
- Very cool
- Why the high message loss?
- Tom found some odd stuff
- But hasn’t got to a root cause
- Tridge and Tom to work together on this
- Tridge might work on this if Tom’s availability doesn’t allow for it
- Tridge will do the rebase
- [10:12 AM] To Weekly devcall: @tridge could you ensure dataflash logging is running when doing your tests, please?
- [10:12 AM] To Weekly devcall: JC reported that CAN seemed to be interfering with dataflash logging.
UTC0015 - Github: update issue templates
- Github issue templates
- New github feature
- Checkbox mechanism
- Used to have it but it was more confusing than anything else
- Added four lines at top saying people should remove stuff
- General agreement this should go in
UTC0019 - Create and use a check-failed function
UTC0037 - Use function pointers to send IMU messagesCreate and use a check-failed function
UTC0045 - Move mavlink reboot up to base class
UTC0050 - Force arm
UTC0058 - libuavcan
- If we bring this one in we are not diverged from upstream
- If we merge this then there’s no reason to fork in the short term
- These commits still have to pass via Pavel, but he seems positive about it
- This needs to be tested a little more before getting merged in
- There was a lot of copy-pasta but Tom’s been trying to fix that
- Not tested by Tom yet
- Needs to be tested before being merged
- This is merging our changes into UAVcan
- We are already running with them
- These patches are for upstream
- There doesn’t seem to be any downside to pushing ahead with this PR
UTC0102 - build server and adding more boards
- Peter ran tests 2.5 hours for current
- 3 times that time for all builds
- Current built scripts not optimized
- Good reason for us to think about optimizing
- J: Do we want to charge people for a service to produce binaries for boards automatically on our servers?
- J: Sell to the hardware vendors?
- Tridge is not in favour
- Community boards / hobbyists
- Wants PRs against master
- This is our normal flow and ensures quality is maintained
- Compiler flag modifications might make ccache work much more effectively
- And relative paths and debug options when not needed
- Maybe a factor of 4 or 5
- [11:11 AM] (Channel) JP: There’s a difference between firmware builds and embedding parameters for rtf’s etc. I think we should build as much as we have resources for. The apj tool for custom firmware defaults might be a better area to look at for the”services” idea, if we want to go down that path (personally I’m not a fan, but done carefully wouldn’t oppose).
- J: User accounts where people can put their own hardware definitions up and have our servers build binaries?
- Tridge would prefer them PR against master
- Resolution: will not produce all boards as not all of them work and the time-cost is too high
UTC0113 - China conference
- Moving along nicely
- Arranging face-to-face meetings between devs and partners
- Randy and Leonard and Tom and Jani will be speaking
UTC0122 - Rover with Randy
- 3.4rc1 is out there
- Being tested
- Won’t make it out as-is as vehicle doesn’t slow down for corners as much as it used to
- Needs to be at least as conservative as it was
UTC0122 - Copter with Randy
- 3.6rc2 is out there
- Will need at least an rc3 because of the ChibiOS i2c issues
- 2D occupancy grid is moving along!
- Focussing this on Rover ATM
UTC0124 - Plane with tridge
- Due for new beta due to sensor issue
- Wants landing gear in too
UTC0126 - best contribution
- Won by both sh83 and chobitsfan
- Funding team will be arranging payment, as usual.
UTC0128 - random