-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
docs: lifecycle feature #1246
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
docs: lifecycle feature #1246
Conversation
db8bef4
to
c2bbad4
Compare
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
4e1e0b1
to
1d2caff
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Coming from FEO Error Handling:
- maximum threshold until startup done should be handled. Do we have a definition for hard/soft thresholds? -> handle same or not?
- In this phase memory allocation is problematic and should end up in error state
- There should be some kind of error or emergency state and safety related problems should be handled
- There should be also some kind of suspend error handling and reset state of activities in the chain
- Not only state errors should be handled.
- Activities can raise errors and also problems regarding com API or external Ressources like GPU/NPU should be handled.
- Abrupt shut down of GPUs for example can lead to memory/cache incomplete / inconsistent or corrupted state there.
- Timing above configured thresholds should raise errors. There is a difference between Estimated worst-case Execution time, actual Worst-Case Execution time and Theoretical Worst-Case Execution time. This depends on criticallty levels of activities. Also activities without any upper bound can exist and should not raise any error.
- Logging in case of error is also a missing part .
- Safety error reporting should also use another channel like the normal communication to prevent interference in case of safety problems.
- Errors can change the flow to some kind of degragation or emergency flow. This is not defined currently.
- Do we want to handle SoC problems like undervoltage, overvoltage, temperature and so on?
- Error handling of different ASIL levels should not interfere or share same resources
- Freeing resources should be part of the middleware -> Error handling if not possible
- On startup resource exhaustion should lead to emergency state
- Validation step for the graph is needed to ensure things like connections are correct or strange relationships found before start > error thrown
- I think we need error handling as stakeholder requirement
docs/features/lifecycle/architecture/configuration_parameters.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
edb6613
to
c0714ee
Compare
fa85986
to
c41e880
Compare
I think we could write a liitle bit more about the component dependencies:
|
3d1f6db
to
b403ed4
Compare
8b02873
to
9dd915c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Minor remarks on terms defined. Otherwise the concept is good.
.. glossary:: | ||
|
||
Launch Manager | ||
Component to start and stop processes on a POSIX like operating system. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this actually start and stop processes or request the operating system to do so? see procmgr
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So far the launch manager is intended to do the fork.
97829b6
to
d06bf49
Compare
d06bf49
to
0f10ac3
Compare
Feature: #909