feat: add autoware_control_center and autoware_node

[xmfcx]

Description

Goals for the v1:

• Lifecycle
• Register/Deregister
  • List potential cases that are handled
• Heartbeat monitoring
  • Error/Warning/Healthy states are part of the heartbeat
• Basic ACC features
  • Report faulty nodes

Remaining tasks

Remaining items won't be handled in this PR.

• Write down the AutowareNode.
  • Create tests for it.
    • Init / Shutdown
    • Register
      • AN is launched first
      • ACC is launched first
      • Duplicate registering with same name
    • Heartbeat
      • Success case
      • Dead upon being late
      • Alive upon coming back

Edge cases

Support:

• ACC runs, AN runs, ACC dies, another ACC comes, AN should register to it.
• AN dies, ACC still has an entry, after a grace period, it should deregister it automatically.

Related links

🖱️Click to expand

Continuation from:

• feat: add autoware_node and autoware_control_center #73

• https://github.com/orgs/autowarefoundation/discussions/3194

Nav2 references

• https://docs.nav2.org/concepts/index.html#lifecycle-nodes-and-bond
• https://docs.nav2.org/configuration/packages/configuring-lifecycle.html
• https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation2/blob/main/nav2_util/include/nav2_util/lifecycle_node.hpp

Autoware.Auto discussions

• Autoware.Auto discussions: https://gitlab.com/autowarefoundation/autoware.auto/AutowareAuto/-/issues/821
• Discuss Implementing LifeCycleNode Support on Autoware.Auto Nodes - https://gitlab.com/autowarefoundation/autoware.auto/AutowareAuto/-/issues/282
• Autoware Diagnostics and Monitoring - https://gist.github.com/xmfcx/7eaae9750d6317a3a2aa23745ac99444

Tests performed

WIP

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below when creating the PR.

• I've confirmed the contribution guidelines.
• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

Post-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below before merging.

• There are no open discussions or they are tracked via tickets.

After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.

[esteve]

@xmfcx I found this about using Kubernetes to ensure a singleton instance:

https://medium.com/@fahed.dorgaa/kubernetes-singleton-pattern-84a88a06727a

And this for integrating Kubernetes with ROS 2:

https://github.com/fujitatomoya/ros_k8s

Hope this helps, let me know if I can help

[xmfcx]

@esteve I've read the medium post and it aims to solve the same problem I had. I've also read the slides and looked into implementations from https://github.com/fujitatomoya/ros_k8s as well.

Kubernetes, also known as K8s, is an open source system for automating deployment, scaling, and management of containerized applications.

But k8s works with containers and I would assume this would have meant that /autoware/control_center node would need to be in its own container? I don't know it too well. But if yes, this is not the solution I'm looking for. I would like to be able to run the entire Autoware in a single container or without any.

I think current solution is enough for now, since in the deployment stage, this would not occur anyways, it is just to prevent adding another thing to debug for developers by making sure there is only one instance of the /autoware/control_center.

[esteve]

@xmfcx yeah, for something like this,, Kubernetes is overkill, I thought it was more about making sure that nodes in a distributed system were only instantiated only. But if it's a tool that runs locally, a lock and a file is more than enough.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.28302% with 131 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (main@df9cd36). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...utoware_control_center/src/control_center_node.cpp	74.10%	17 Missing and 12 partials ⚠️
...utoware_control_center/src/control_center_main.cpp	48.78%	12 Missing and 9 partials ⚠️
...toware_control_center/test/test_cc_registering.cpp	57.44%	3 Missing and 17 partials ⚠️
...autoware_control_center/test/test_cc_heartbeat.cpp	78.94%	3 Missing and 9 partials ⚠️
common/autoware_node/src/node.cpp	79.62%	5 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
common/autoware_node/test/test_an_registering.cpp	80.00%	0 Missing and 10 partials ⚠️
...mmon/autoware_control_center/test/test_utility.hpp	85.00%	3 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
common/autoware_node/test/test_an_heartbeat.cpp	87.17%	0 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...ommon/autoware_node/test/test_an_init_shutdown.cpp	81.48%	1 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
common/autoware_test_node/src/test_node.cpp	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #84   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   75.28%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       13           
  Lines           ?      530           
  Branches        ?      318           
=======================================
  Hits            ?      399           
  Misses          ?       50           
  Partials        ?       81           

Flag	Coverage Δ
differential	75.28% <75.28%> (?)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[stale]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the Autoware project!

🚧 If your pull request is in progress, switch it to draft mode.

Please ensure:

• You've checked our contribution guidelines.
• Your PR follows our pull request guidelines.
• All required CI checks pass before marking the PR ready for review.

[xmfcx]

@mitsudome-r this is ready for review.

I will go and fix spell-check-differential issues now. (Copy the repo and configure it)
Then will look into cppcheck, it's not working properly.

[xmfcx]

Thanks, it was fixed:

• https://github.com/autowarefoundation/autoware.core/actions/runs/12114614556/job/33941556452

It seems to not care about the capitalization ✅

[youtalk]

@xmfcx We would like to review autoware_node first and then review autoware_control_center next. Could you split this PR into 2 PRs?

[xmfcx]

@youtalk -san, these don't make much sense to be added individually:

• autoware_control_center
• autoware_control_center_msgs
• autoware_node
• autoware_test_node

And they have test dependencies to each other.

For example autoware_node has a <test_depend>autoware_control_center</test_depend> because in the test it communicates with it.

If I make separate PRs, the tests would fail.

[youtalk]

@xmfcx I would like to thoroughly review the source code of autoware.core, but I cannot review all 47 files and 2,463 added lines at once. If it is not possible to split by package, would it be possible to divide the PRs for each goal instead?

Goals for the v1:

• Lifecycle
• Register/Deregister
  • List potential cases that are handled
• Heartbeat monitoring
  • Error/Warning/Healthy states are part of the heartbeat
• Basic ACC features
  • Report faulty nodes

For example, we could start with an almost empty implementation of the Lifecycle, and then build on it step by step.
It might feel like extra effort until completion, but the review process will be faster, which I believe will ultimately lead to quicker overall completion.

[xmfcx]

Sure, let's go feature by feature 👍