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

feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional #1698

Merged

Conversation

kaancolak
Copy link
Contributor

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak kcolak@leodrive.ai

Description

When working without lanelet/vector map, we don't use any tier4_perception_launch configuration. use_vector_map is a parameter for the base launch files(autoware.launch.xml, logging_simulator.launch.xml) but this parameter doesn't affect "object_lanelet_filter".

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

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

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

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.

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
@kaancolak
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kenji-miyake Miyake-san, Could you review or assign an appropriate reviewer to this PR?

@kenji-miyake
Copy link
Contributor

Sure. I think @yukkysaito and @miursh are the right developers to review this.

@yukkysaito yukkysaito added the component:perception Advanced sensor data processing and environment understanding. (auto-assigned) label Aug 25, 2022
Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 25, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #1698 (c4eebdc) into main (bca42f4) will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head c4eebdc differs from pull request most recent head eae052f. Consider uploading reports for the commit eae052f to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1698      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   10.67%   10.72%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1107     1105       -2     
  Lines       78658    78400     -258     
  Branches    18724    18620     -104     
==========================================
+ Hits         8393     8409      +16     
+ Misses      61261    61078     -183     
+ Partials     9004     8913      -91     
Flag Coverage Δ *Carryforward flag
differential ∅ <ø> (?)
total 10.71% <ø> (+0.05%) ⬆️ Carriedforward from 866499b

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...planning_evaluator/src/planning_evaluator_node.cpp 37.11% <0.00%> (-1.04%) ⬇️
perception/tensorrt_yolo/src/nodelet.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
perception/lidar_centerpoint/src/node.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
perception/tensorrt_yolo/lib/src/trt_yolo.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...erception/tensorrt_yolo/lib/include/calibrator.hpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...erception/tensorrt_yolo/lib/include/cuda_utils.hpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...nning/behavior_path_planner/src/path_utilities.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...tion/traffic_light_classifier/utils/trt_common.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...on/lidar_apollo_instance_segmentation/src/node.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...on/traffic_light_classifier/src/cnn_classifier.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 31 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@yukkysaito yukkysaito self-requested a review August 26, 2022 01:08
Copy link
Contributor

@yukkysaito yukkysaito left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. (I don't confirm to run)
@miursh can you check the code?

@miursh
Copy link
Contributor

miursh commented Aug 29, 2022

@kaancolak In this PR, do you want to change not to use object_lanelet_filter or object_filter itself (including object_position_filter) ?
If you don't want to use object filter at final stage, arg name "use_vector_map" is kind of misleading, I think. "use_object_filter" is better.

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
@kaancolak kaancolak force-pushed the make-lanelet-filter-optional branch from c4eebdc to 737c770 Compare August 29, 2022 18:15
Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
@kaancolak
Copy link
Contributor Author

@miursh Yes, I agree that it makes more sense to control the object filter with an extra parameter. I added and pushed the "use_object_filter" parameter.

Copy link
Contributor

@miursh miursh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@kaancolak kaancolak merged commit 2869aea into autowarefoundation:main Aug 31, 2022
boyali referenced this pull request in boyali/autoware.universe Sep 28, 2022
…ier4#1698)

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix arg

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix argument var

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): add new parameter

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Co-authored-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
boyali referenced this pull request in boyali/autoware.universe Oct 3, 2022
…ier4#1698)

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix arg

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix argument var

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): add new parameter

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Co-authored-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
boyali referenced this pull request in boyali/autoware.universe Oct 3, 2022
…ier4#1698)

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix arg

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix argument var

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): add new parameter

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Co-authored-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
yukke42 pushed a commit to tzhong518/autoware.universe that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2022
…utowarefoundation#1698)

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix arg

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix argument var

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): add new parameter

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Co-authored-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
boyali referenced this pull request in boyali/autoware.universe Oct 19, 2022
…ier4#1698)

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): make lanelet object filter optional

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix arg

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): fix argument var

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

* feat(tier4_perception_launch): add new parameter

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>

Signed-off-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Co-authored-by: Kaan Colak <kcolak@leodrive.ai>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component:perception Advanced sensor data processing and environment understanding. (auto-assigned)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants