Skip to content

Conversation

@jankubovy
Copy link

@jankubovy jankubovy commented Mar 14, 2025

This mapper should serve as a basis for the ongoing generic VHAL discussions. See the docs/vhal.md for more information.

@jankubovy jankubovy force-pushed the vhal-generator branch 4 times, most recently from 10ed133 to 339db9e Compare March 14, 2025 14:58
@jankubovy jankubovy marked this pull request as draft March 14, 2025 15:01
@mikehaller
Copy link

Would you be able to provide an example vss_to_android_property_map.json ?

@jankubovy
Copy link
Author

Would you be able to provide an example vss_to_android_property_map.json ?

Just generate one with:
vspec export jsonvhal --vspec /path/to/vehicle_signal_specification/spec/VehicleSignalSpecification.vspec --min-property-id 32768 --vhal-map vss_to_android_property_map.json --output-dir /path/to/output

The --vhal-map is input/output. If the file does not exist it will be created. You just need to point to checked out https://github.com/COVESA/vehicle_signal_specification with the --vspec param.

Eventually COVESA should maintain a common vss_to_android_property_map.json but that should be discussed further. For now and testing everyone can just generate their own.

@jankubovy jankubovy force-pushed the vhal-generator branch 3 times, most recently from 9ad57fc to d23c553 Compare March 18, 2025 12:51
@jankubovy jankubovy requested a review from sschleemilch March 18, 2025 13:53
@jankubovy jankubovy force-pushed the vhal-generator branch 8 times, most recently from cc8c987 to a2c86a7 Compare March 21, 2025 17:02
@jankubovy
Copy link
Author

jankubovy commented Mar 24, 2025

Would you be able to provide an example vss_to_android_property_map.json ?

@mikehaller there are minimal examples in the tests if you just want to see how it may look like. E.g. tests/vspec/test_static_uids_vhal/validation_jsons/validation_group_1_min_32768.json

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

MoM:

  • Presented at meeting

@slawr
Copy link

slawr commented Jul 28, 2025

From the doc (https://github.com/COVESA/vss-tools/blob/a2c86a73c939c0818d88116771461c7186aee2c1/docs/vhal.md#property-change-mode):

STATIC : used to VSS node types ATTRIBUTE and ACTUATOR

Can you explain why an VSS actuator node has a static change mode? Perhaps I misunderstand the meaning of change mode in the mapper.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kubovy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kubovy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kubovy <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kubovy <[email protected]>
@jankubovy
Copy link
Author

From the doc (https://github.com/COVESA/vss-tools/blob/a2c86a73c939c0818d88116771461c7186aee2c1/docs/vhal.md#property-change-mode):

STATIC : used to VSS node types ATTRIBUTE and ACTUATOR

Can you explain why an VSS actuator node has a static change mode? Perhaps I misunderstand the meaning of change mode in the mapper.

Hi, I have overlooked https://covesa.github.io/vehicle_signal_specification/rule_set/data_entry/sensor_actuator/#actuator-type:

..., can be read and written. ...

should be same as sensor. I will fix that.

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the updates @jankubovy . Is the PR ready to review (and later merge) - if so change status to "ready to review"

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

@jankubovy
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the updates @jankubovy . Is the PR ready to review (and later merge) - if so change status to "ready to review"

Hi @erikbosch I would merge it when the output, the VHAL exporter here is producing, is actually going to be used in the VHAL project. That project did not start yet, therefore I would not merge this PR yet. What do you think?

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the clarification @jankubovy. Based on that explanation I see no problem keeping it in Draft status. We do not have any major refactoring for vss-tools planned, so should in general not be a too big risk for regressions due to changes in vss-tools framework.

requires-python = ">=3.10"
dependencies = [
"anytree>=2.12.1",
"bump2version>=1.0.1", # x
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should be in dev dependencies but I guess that's what the x is for?

@renjithrajagopal-sudo
Copy link

renjithrajagopal-sudo commented Aug 20, 2025

@jankubovy Thanks for reference. Have you done some mapping of data types of VSS vs VHAL & it's incompatibility somewhere ? Will VSS change for VHAL ? E.g Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel.Angle is int16 where as VHAL is Float.

@petervolvowinz Mapping file could be a reference for your semantic matching tool though that is applicable for VHAL to VSS as well.

@jankubovy
Copy link
Author

Have you done some mapping of data types of VSS vs VHAL & it's incompatibility somewhere ? Will VSS change for VHAL ? E.g Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel.Angle is int16 where as VHAL is Float.

Hi @renjithrajagopal-sudo we have the field "formula" for mapping differences like those you are mentioning. Still work in progress. As of now such conversions have to entered manually in the generated mapping file. But it will be preserved on future runs of the mapper.

@renjithrajagopal-sudo
Copy link

Have you done some mapping of data types of VSS vs VHAL & it's incompatibility somewhere ? Will VSS change for VHAL ? E.g Vehicle.Chassis.SteeringWheel.Angle is int16 where as VHAL is Float.

Hi @renjithrajagopal-sudo we have the field "formula" for mapping differences like those you are mentioning. Still work in progress. As of now such conversions have to entered manually in the generated mapping file. But it will be preserved on future runs of the mapper.

Ok. Do you mean both range and scale will be preserved under this formula as well for similar use case? E.g A float which was converted to int16(due to VSS) then VSS to VHAL which expects float. Subsystem(100.34) -> VSS(10034) -> VHAL(100.34) , then formula validates range and know scale of 100

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants