Skip to content

PoC of streaming API for external_control#528

Open
acmorrow wants to merge 8 commits into
UniversalRobots:masterfrom
acmorrow:streaming
Open

PoC of streaming API for external_control#528
acmorrow wants to merge 8 commits into
UniversalRobots:masterfrom
acmorrow:streaming

Conversation

@acmorrow

@acmorrow acmorrow commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@urfeex - Here is what I had Claude put together to demonstrate the possibility of keeping open trajectories, per #524.

It includes:

  • The addition of the STREAM_START and STREAM_END control messages to the TrajectoryControlMesssage enumeration.
  • An integration test for streaming and an example program.
  • Support for configuring the cmake build with a target IP for integration testing. Not perfect since it gets baked into the build, but not terrible either.
  • Argument parsing fixes such that setting the robot IP on the command line works for various integration tests.
  • Updates to the external_contro.urscript to support stream start and stream end.

I'm using this right now and it seems to work for some basic cases. I haven't stress tested it or thought deeply about the various edge cases or error scenarios that this may need to cover.

The goal here is really just to put some code behind the ideas over in #524 so we can discuss further. I'm happy to rework any of this as necessary.

I will also leave some comments directly on the review for a few things I want to call out.


Note

High Risk
Changes real-time robot motion protocol in external_control URScript and trajectory control semantics; incorrect streaming/cancel/count handling can truncate motion or report wrong results on hardware.

Overview
Adds open-ended trajectory streaming so producers can send spline points without declaring the total count up front, then finish with TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END and the total points written.

The C++ API gains TRAJECTORY_STREAM_START and TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END on TrajectoryControlMessage, with expanded docs on ReverseInterface / UrDriver::writeTrajectoryControlMessage. external_control.urscript implements streaming via trajectory_streaming, a STREAMING_SENTINEL point budget, STREAM_END math to convert remaining buffered points to a finite drain, guards against stray/double STREAM_END, streaming-aware cancel (point count), and narrower underrun vs clean end handling in trajectoryThread.

Ships examples/trajectory_streaming.cpp (finite pre-position + quintic stream demo with NOOP keepalives) and headless integration tests (test_trajectory_streaming.cpp) covering success, underrun, cancel, and regression cases for stray/double STREAM_END and over-count STREAM_END.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit c0f380c. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript Outdated
Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript
Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript Outdated
}
const auto stream_end_send_wall = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
g_my_robot->getUrDriver()->writeTrajectoryControlMessage(
urcl::control::TrajectoryControlMessage::TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END, k_num_points);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is an important note: the client is obligated to provide the total number of points streamed when calling TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END, so that we can properly reset the counter so it counts down to zero and the trajectory ends naturally.

Comment thread tests/CMakeLists.txt
@acmorrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - I see the bot has flagged a few things, I'll take a look at those and post an update.

@acmorrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - Also, an update: today we got this running on a physical UR5e and we were able to stream to the arm. So, there is at least some evidence that this is feasible in the real world.

@acmorrow

acmorrow commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - Pushed an update to address the deficiencies that the cursor bot tagged. I had claude write some tests, we confirmed they failed, made fixes, confirmed they passed.

Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript

@urfeex urfeex left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It would be nice if we could move the IP-address refactoring to a separate PR, so this one gets a bit smaller in scope.

From a first glance, this looks quite clean. We would need some documentation updates, both on the trajectory point interface and one for the example (which could contain a lot of the text written in the example itself right now).

* \param trajectory_action One of the values of TrajectoryControlMessage. The value selects which
* trajectory-control action the URScript dispatcher takes, and dictates how \p point_number is
* interpreted:
* - TRAJECTORY_CANCEL (-1): Cancels the currently executing trajectory. \p point_number is unused.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What happens to the remaining points if a trajectory is canceled? If I understand things correctly, the buffer cleanup will try to clean a very high number of points and then hit the socket read timeout as defined in clearTrajectoryPointsThread(). We could make this more effective (avoid the timeout) by passing the total number of points along as done with TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END. It should still work passing along 0 to not break behavior.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just tested this and adding trajectory_points_left = params_mult[3] - (STREAMING_SENTINEL - trajectory_points_left) in the script code section for elif params_mult[2] == TRAJECTORY_MODE_CANCEL: made the cleanup function clean the remaining number of points not timing out on reading from the socket.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@urfeex - I just want to confirm before I make the change: you suggest that for writeTrajectoryControlMessage(TRAJECTORY_CANCEL, ..., if the trajectory was started with TRAJECTORY_STREAM_START, then point_number becomes meaningful, and should equal the total number of points sent, just like it would be for TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END, and then around line 1196 in external_control.urscript, if we are in streaming mode we adjust the point count as indicated above?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, exactly. Do you think, that makes sense?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it makes total sense. I will get an update pushed.

* calls the producer will issue on the trajectory socket. URScript reads exactly that many points
* and then completes.
* - TRAJECTORY_STREAM_START (2): Begins an open-ended (streaming) trajectory. The producer streams
* spline points and signals end-of-stream with TRAJECTORY_STREAM_END. \p point_number is unused.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this restricted to splines only? From what I can see the same mechanism also works for sending movej, movel, etc.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just tested this with the motion sequence from the instruction_executor example. This worked like a charm.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's great: it isn't a mechanism we happen to use right now, so not something I was thinking about testing. I could change that language from spline points to points or primitives?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How about motion segments or motion primitives?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I'll do motion primitives as that is what spline points actually reduce to, so it is I think the most accurate.

Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript
@urfeex

urfeex commented Jun 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I've added the two issues that this PR will close when being merged.

@acmorrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - No problem about splitting out the testing changes, they were in their own commit anyway. I've made a new issue (#530) and a new PR (#531). I just made a new branch and cherry-picked out the relevant commit from this one.

We will need to sort out how to drop out that commit from this review since it is the base commit. Probably, we just review what is here until satisfied, and then I'll do a final rebase above master and force-push to drop out the now vacuous testing changes commit, but lmk if you want to handle it differently.

@urfeex

urfeex commented Jun 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yes, a rebase on master once the testing changes are merged should be the way to go.

@urfeex

urfeex commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@acmorrow I've merged #531, so you should be able to rebase this ontop of master.

@acmorrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - OK, rebased and force pushed.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 78.79%. Comparing base (757d512) to head (fef566b).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #528      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.78%   78.79%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         115      115              
  Lines        6765     6764       -1     
  Branches     2988     2988              
==========================================
  Hits         5330     5330              
+ Misses       1065     1060       -5     
- Partials      370      374       +4     
Flag Coverage Δ
check_version_ur10-3.15.8 11.51% <ø> (+0.35%) ⬆️
check_version_ur10e-10.11.0 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur10e-5.15.2 11.34% <ø> (+0.23%) ⬆️
check_version_ur12e-10.12.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur12e-5.25.1 11.15% <ø> (-0.36%) ⬇️
check_version_ur15-10.12.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur15-5.25.1 11.11% <ø> (-0.19%) ⬇️
check_version_ur16e-10.12.1 11.15% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
check_version_ur16e-5.25.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur18-10.12.1 11.15% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur18-5.25.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur20-10.12.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur20-5.25.1 11.15% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
check_version_ur3-3.14.3 11.34% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur30-10.12.1 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur30-5.25.1 11.30% <ø> (+0.14%) ⬆️
check_version_ur3e-10.11.0 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur3e-5.9.4 11.15% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
check_version_ur5-3.15.8 11.11% <ø> (-0.24%) ⬇️
check_version_ur5e-10.11.0 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur5e-5.12.8 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur7e-10.11.0 11.15% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
check_version_ur7e-5.22.2 11.11% <ø> (ø)
check_version_ur8long-10.12.1 11.11% <ø> (-0.05%) ⬇️
check_version_ur8long-5.25.1 11.30% <ø> (+0.14%) ⬆️
python_scripts 75.90% <ø> (ø)
start_ursim 82.84% <ø> (-0.43%) ⬇️
ur5-3.14.3 74.30% <ø> (-0.16%) ⬇️
ur5e-10.11.0 69.14% <ø> (-0.11%) ⬇️
ur5e-10.12.0 70.23% <ø> (-0.10%) ⬇️
ur5e-10.7.0 68.64% <ø> (+0.07%) ⬆️
ur5e-5.9.4 75.12% <ø> (+0.06%) ⬆️
ur7e-10.13.0 70.25% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@acmorrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@urfeex - Pushed two commits: one with the pure comment change about splines, and another with the improvements around cancellation taking the number of points.

@cursor cursor Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes using default effort and found 1 potential issue.

Fix All in Cursor

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit f70970d. Configure here.

Comment thread resources/external_control.urscript
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

2 participants