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

Allow both RAPID running and undefined states #96

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 31, 2020

Conversation

jontje
Copy link
Contributor

@jontje jontje commented May 26, 2020

EGM knows about these RAPID execution states:

  • UNDEFINED
  • STOPPED
  • RUNNING

There is a bug in EGM that after a restart of the robot controller, then RAPID is in the UNDEFINED state even if it has clearly been started. This PR makes both RUNNING and UNDEFINED states acceptable when sending commands. The rationale is that the robot controller should internally ignore EGM commands if it's in a bad state.

It's been like this for some years now, and I have reported it a few times but it has not been fixed so far.

Also, I have used this workaround for years without problems.

@jontje jontje requested a review from gavanderhoorn May 26, 2020 11:58
Copy link
Member

@gavanderhoorn gavanderhoorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand the rationale, but we need to add it to the code.

Please see the in-line comment.

src/egm_base_interface.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

I've posted in ros-industrial/industrial_ci#515 to figure out why CI is failing suddenly.

@mathias-luedtke
Copy link
Member

@gavanderhoorn: please rerun the job :)

@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

Seems to have been fixed @ipa-mdl 👍

thanks for the fix.

@gavanderhoorn gavanderhoorn merged commit d07c3d6 into ros-industrial:master May 31, 2020
@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

Thanks @jontje for the PR 👍

@jontje jontje deleted the egm_bug_workaround branch June 1, 2020 06:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants