Skip to content

feat(deps): add score_config_management to reference integration - #299

Merged
pawelrutkaq merged 6 commits into
eclipse-score:mainfrom
Chahult:feat/add_score_config_management
Aug 17, 2026
Merged

feat(deps): add score_config_management to reference integration#299
pawelrutkaq merged 6 commits into
eclipse-score:mainfrom
Chahult:feat/add_score_config_management

Conversation

@Chahult

@Chahult Chahult commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
  • Added score_config_management module (commit ) to known_good.json under target_sw with code_root_path //score/config_management/...

  • Regenerate bazel_common/score_modules_target_sw.MODULE.bazel

@Chahult

Chahult commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @pawelrutkaq @PiotrKorkus @nradakovic @antonkri @AlexanderLanin , could someone please unlock this workflow and review our changes? Thanks!

LittleHuba
LittleHuba previously approved these changes Jul 29, 2026
@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from 78bd1c3 to bd8ae34 Compare July 29, 2026 09:18
@Chahult
Chahult requested a review from LittleHuba July 29, 2026 09:19
@Chahult

Chahult commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Updated the baselibs to the latest version as builds are breaking.

@LittleHuba

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Updated the baselibs to the latest version as builds are breaking.

Please bump to the version pulled in by communication. That gives you a good chance to have a successful build.

@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch 12 times, most recently from de696a5 to 3e1e4d9 Compare July 31, 2026 10:11
@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from d4e848d to c017095 Compare August 10, 2026 07:05
Pin score_config_management to 49f26b74 and add a patch (sourced from
config_management PR#37) fixing the ProxyFuture API migration and
removing SOCAL/component_tests targets not present in the OSS build.
@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from c017095 to a9899c5 Compare August 10, 2026 09:21
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html

@Chahult

Chahult commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hi @pawelrutkaq @PiotrKorkus , could you please review and approve these changes? The aim of this PR is to add score_config_management to the reference integration.

michaelsaborov
michaelsaborov previously approved these changes Aug 10, 2026

@pawelrutkaq pawelrutkaq left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Two points

  • please deploy the example (from your repo) in showcases as other modules does
  • please at least setup correctly module in bazel registry (no need of release ) -> already done

Comment thread known_good.json Outdated
"repo": "https://github.com/eclipse-score/config_management.git",
"hash": "b22ca9bd222b99985be4339187c639d6862051a0",
"bazel_patches": [
"patches/config_management/001-fix-communication-api-and-remove-targets.patch"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since this looks like an arbitrary patch, someone from com shall ack it.

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.

The current name 001-fix-communication-api-and-remove-targets.patch is misleading — the patch doesn't fix the communication library, it adapts config_management to the new ProxyFuture API and removes internal/ARA-specific targets. Let me rename it

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please do not integrate new module with patches, please fix it upstream

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.

The OptionalProxyData → ProxyFuture part of the patch is a temporary mismatch caused by an in-progress mw::com migration: the internal main repo still uses the old OptionalProxyData API, while the OSS communication repo has already migrated to ProxyFuture. Once that migration completes and syncs upstream, config_management's main repo will use ProxyFuture too, and this part of the patch will no longer be needed — no upstream fix is possible for this piece yet.

Comment thread known_good.json
"//score/config_management/config_daemon/code/services/details/mw_com:unit_test",
"//score/config_management/config_provider/code/config_provider/factory:unit_tests_mw_com",
"//score/config_management/config_provider/code/proxies/details:unit_test_mw",
"//score/config_management/dependability/..."

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why we need those exclusions ?

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.

1.mw_com tests: require a running LoLa/SOME/IP runtime — the tests themselves are tagged "exclusive" because "Sandboxing is not properly working with LoLa message passing 2.0". Same reason score_communication excludes //score/mw/com/impl:unit_test_runtime_single_exec and //score/mw/com/impl:runtime_test.

2.dependability/...: these are component/dependable_element safety-metadata targets from score_tooling, not executable tests. Including //... without filtering them would cause build failures.

@pawelrutkaq pawelrutkaq left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If comm has already this change in, I would suggest to update com as well here.

@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch 5 times, most recently from d717f5d to cf3520b Compare August 12, 2026 06:42
@Chahult
Chahult requested a review from pawelrutkaq August 12, 2026 06:57
@pawelrutkaq

pawelrutkaq commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I see that there are some errros in CFM example (especially from CFG daemon):

63ns Starting example 'Config Management Daemon Example'
6.54µs App 1: starting /showcases/bin/config_daemon
App 1: spawned command cd "/showcases/data/config_management" && "/showcases/bin/config_daemon" "-s" "/showcases/data/config_management/etc/mw_com_config.json"
mw::log initialization error: Error No logging configuration files could be found. occurred with context information: Failed to load configuration files. Fallback to console logging.
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009148 000 ECU1 NONE lola log warn verbose 1 <maxSamples> property for event is DEPRECATED! use <numberOfSampleSlots> property for event
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE LM log error verbose 3 [Lifecycle client] FD  111  is invalid for kRunning report
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE App log error verbose 3 ConfigDaemon:: Run Failed to create InitialQualifierStateSender callback
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE DFLT log error verbose 1 Error occurred during Run

@NicolasFussberger

NicolasFussberger commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I see that there are some errros in CFM example (especially from CFG daemon):

63ns Starting example 'Config Management Daemon Example'
6.54µs App 1: starting /showcases/bin/config_daemon
App 1: spawned command cd "/showcases/data/config_management" && "/showcases/bin/config_daemon" "-s" "/showcases/data/config_management/etc/mw_com_config.json"
mw::log initialization error: Error No logging configuration files could be found. occurred with context information: Failed to load configuration files. Fallback to console logging.
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009148 000 ECU1 NONE lola log warn verbose 1 <maxSamples> property for event is DEPRECATED! use <numberOfSampleSlots> property for event
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE LM log error verbose 3 [Lifecycle client] FD  111  is invalid for kRunning report
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE App log error verbose 3 ConfigDaemon:: Run Failed to create InitialQualifierStateSender callback
2026/08/13 06:22:57.2177293 4153009156 000 ECU1 NONE DFLT log error verbose 1 Error occurred during Run

I assume the error regarding lifecycle is that the config manager uses the lifecycle API to report running state, but it is not started by Launch Manager so the IPC channel is not actually available.
I think this has no other consequences for the demo despite the error log.

@Chahult

Chahult commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Error happens in config_management:
score::mw::service (the generic service-registration framework in communication) has no real implementation yet — only a stub, added without verifying it actually works with ConfigDaemon.
Even with that fixed, the "demo" only proves ConfigDaemon can call OfferService() successfully and stay alive — it's an in-process stub, not the real LoLa/mw::com IPC backend (that migration is still ongoing in SPP).
Root conclusion: with only a stub mw::service, we can show the daemon starts and doesn't crash, but we cannot demonstrate any real service behavior, because there's no client and no real backend to show data flowing.

Proposed path forward:
Preferred: merge score_config_management into the reference_integration PR without a demo example — avoids implying functionality that doesn't exist yet.
If a demo is mandatory: provide a stub demo with no real service implementation — i.e., just start ConfigDaemon, confirm it comes up and stays alive without crashing, purely to unblock the PR from pending state. This would not demonstrate the service actually being consumed.
We can revisit a real, meaningful demo once mw::service has a proper implementation and the SPP mw::com migration lands.

@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from cf3520b to 30c1273 Compare August 17, 2026 06:40
@pawelrutkaq

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Please make PR green, in the example description, write non functional yet and we are good. Keep in mind that the patch You add shall be removed until 0.9, which is 07.09.2026

@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from 30c1273 to 9d5e659 Compare August 17, 2026 12:41
@Chahult

Chahult commented Aug 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Please make PR green, in the example description, write non functional yet and we are good. Keep in mind that the patch You add shall be removed until 0.9, which is 07.09.2026

Sure, currently we are working on that part where we will remove this patch and add a proper demo example.

@Chahult
Chahult force-pushed the feat/add_score_config_management branch from 2b26fb0 to 80d56cd Compare August 17, 2026 12:50
@pawelrutkaq
pawelrutkaq merged commit 9143efa into eclipse-score:main Aug 17, 2026
16 checks passed
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.

5 participants