106 feature add setpoint check before applying strengths #126

gupichon · 2026-01-16T16:55:05Z

Description

DeviceAccess can provide a range of acceptable values.

Related Issue

Closes #106

Features/issues described there are:

DeviceAccess can provide a range of acceptable values.
Write on devices on the control system will now check the range if it is provided.

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

Used in case of application of values on magnet arrays.

gupichon-soleil · 2026-01-21T14:03:07Z

@JeanLucPons , it's ready for review.

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-21T14:35:21Z

OK Thanks.

I'm not really in favor of the check_device_availability() which is useless for combined function magnets that use RWMapper as a read is done before.
Aggregator are not checked. Would you like to do the aggregator later in an other PR ?

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-21T14:55:06Z

It behaves very strangely ?

import time
from pyaml.accelerator import Accelerator
sr = Accelerator.load("tests/config/EBSTune.yaml")
mag = sr.live.get_magnet("QD2E-C04").strength
print( mag.get() )
print( mag._RWStrengthScalar__dev )
mag.set(100)
time.sleep(10)
print( mag.get() )

[ubuntu20acu.pons] > python tests/jlp_test.py 
21 Jan% 2026, 15:53:04 | WARNING | PyAML Tango control system binding (0.3.2) initialized with name 'live' and TANGO_HOST=ebs-simu-2:10000
-0.6178546595342231
Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=None)
0.0

No excpetion and the beam is lost !?

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-21T15:06:09Z

Addind a range in the yaml seems to work but the tango range seems to be ignored

pyaml.common.exception.PyAMLException: The values are out of range: 110.0, [10.0, 109.0] for device Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=(10.0, 109.0))

gupichon-soleil · 2026-01-22T09:00:45Z

Addind a range in the yaml seems to work but the tango range seems to be ignored

pyaml.common.exception.PyAMLException: The values are out of range: 110.0, [10.0, 109.0] for device Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=(10.0, 109.0))

This needs to be fixed in tango-pyaml. I tested it with a mocker, but I may have done it wrong. I will check it.

gupichon-soleil · 2026-01-22T09:03:11Z

OK Thanks.

* I'm not really in favor of the `check_device_availability()` which is useless for combined function magnets that use `RWMapper` as a read is done before.

* Aggregator are not checked. Would you like to do the aggregator later in an other PR ?

Ok, I will remove the availability check and add the range check to the aggregators.

gupichon-soleil · 2026-01-22T09:50:59Z

That's strange, it works for me. With tango-pyaml only...

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T10:07:51Z

OK I will double check, i might be confused by the fact the the range is "lazily" initialized.

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T10:18:26Z

OK it works (I definitely forgot something) but I still do not know why it claims that the range is None ?
But as you said, it is link to tango-pyaml.

[ubuntu20acu.pons] > python tests/jlp_test.py 
22 Jan% 2026, 11:12:09 | WARNING | PyAML Tango control system binding (0.3.2) initialized with name 'live' and TANGO_HOST=ebs-simu-2:10000
-0.6178546595342231
Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=None)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/esrf/pons/pyaml/tests/jlp_test.py", line 9, in <module>
    mag.set(-100)
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/control/abstract_impl.py", line 299, in set
    raise PyAMLException(f"The values are out of range: {current}, {dev_range} for device {self.__dev}")
pyaml.common.exception.PyAMLException: The values are out of range: 110.0, [0.0, 108.0] for device Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=None)

gupichon-soleil · 2026-01-22T10:34:44Z

That range is the one defined in the YAML file. If you want it to be automatically filled, it would require fetching it from the device. Due to lazy instantiation, I don't think this is a good idea...

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T10:39:32Z

OK. I think, you can use the _cfg field of the attached device (if not already filled by the conf) instead of creating a new range attribute but we can discuss this later in tango-pyaml.

…h aggregator.

gupichon · 2026-01-22T13:59:06Z

It should be ok now @JeanLucPons

gupichon · 2026-01-22T13:59:45Z

You have to test it with the matching tango-pyaml branch.

gupichon · 2026-01-22T14:00:53Z

The developpement for pyaml-cs-oa must be done once we agree on the final implementation.

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T14:45:40Z

I'm sorry but i still do not manage to make it work :(

from pyaml.accelerator import Accelerator

sr = Accelerator.load("tests/config/EBSTune-range.yaml")
mag = sr.live.get_magnets("QForTune").strengths
mag.set( mag.get()*1000.0 )

Failed with:

[ubuntu20acu.pons] > python tests/jlp_test.py 
22 Jan% 2026, 15:39:21 | WARNING | Tango control system binding for PyAML initialized with name 'live' and TANGO_HOST=ebs-simu-2:10000
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/esrf/pons/pyaml/tests/jlp_test.py", line 5, in <module>
    mag.set( mag.get()*1000.0 )
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/arrays/magnet_array.py", line 30, in set
    self.__aggregator.set(nvalue)
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/control/abstract_impl.py", line 173, in set
    self._devs.set(newHardwareValues)
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tango/pyaml/multi_attribute.py", line 85, in set
    self[index]._attribute_dev.write_attribute_reply(call_id, timeout)
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tango/green.py", line 231, in greener
    return executor.run(fn, args, kwargs, wait=wait, timeout=timeout)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tango/green.py", line 121, in run
    return fn(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tango/device_proxy.py", line 1042, in __DeviceProxy__write_attribute_reply
    return __write_attributes_reply__(self, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tango/device_proxy.py", line 953, in __write_attributes_reply__
    return self.__write_attributes_reply(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
tango._tango.DevFailed: DevFailed[
    DevError[
        desc = Failed to execute DeviceProxy::write_attributes_reply() on device srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e, object(s) Current
        origin = DeviceProxy::write_attributes_reply()
        reason = API_AttributeFailed
        severity = ERR
    ]
]

which is the buggy error we get when the Tango PS return an error, see here

Here is my tune file:

type: pyaml.accelerator
facility: ESRF
machine: sr
energy: 6e9
simulators:
  - type: pyaml.lattice.simulator
    lattice: sr/lattices/ebs.mat
    name: design
controls:
  - type: tango.pyaml.controlsystem
    tango_host: ebs-simu-2:10000
    name: live
data_folder: /data/store
arrays:
  - type: pyaml.arrays.magnet
    name: QForTune
    elements:
      - QD2E-C04
      - QD2A-C05
      - QD2E-C05
      - QD2A-C06
      - QD2E-C06
      - ...
devices:
- type: pyaml.magnet.quadrupole
  name: QF1E-C04
  model:
    type: pyaml.magnet.linear_model
    calibration_factor: 1.00054
    crosstalk: 1.0
    curve:
      type: pyaml.configuration.csvcurve
      file: sr/magnet_models/QF1_strength.csv
    unit: 1/m
    powerconverter:
      type: tango.pyaml.attribute
      attribute: srmag/vps-qf1/c04-e/current
      range: [10,109]
      unit: A
- type: pyaml.magnet.quadrupole
  name: QF1A-C05
  model:
    type: pyaml.magnet.linear_model
    calibration_factor: 0.996841
    crosstalk: 1.0
    curve:
      type: pyaml.configuration.csvcurve
      file: sr/magnet_models/QF1_strength.csv
    unit: 1/m
    powerconverter:
      type: tango.pyaml.attribute
      attribute: srmag/vps-qf1/c05-a/current
      range: [10,109]
      unit: A
...

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T14:57:53Z

In control/abstract_impl.py :

        dev_range = self._devs.get_range()
        print(newHardwareValues)
        print(dev_range)
        if not check_range(newHardwareValues, dev_range):
            raise PyAMLException(f"The values are out of range: {newHardwareValues}, {dev_range} for device {self._devs}")

outputs

[110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.
110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110. 110.]
None

hardware setpoints are the one expected.
range is None ?
Is there something wrong in my config ?

gupichon · 2026-01-22T15:33:47Z

I've turn your case into a test. It works. I've done a minor change due to the improvement in the dummy CS but nothing critical.

gupichon · 2026-01-22T15:47:24Z

The exception (simplified), before I handle it as a valid result for the test:

@pytest.mark.parametrize(
"install_test_package",
[{"name": "tango-pyaml", "path": "tests/dummy_cs/tango-pyaml"}],
indirect=True,
)
def test_rf_multi_notrans(install_test_package):
sr: Accelerator = Accelerator.load("tests/config/EBSTune-range.yaml")
mag = sr.live.get_magnets("QForTune").strengths
mag.set(mag.get() * 1000.0)

tests/test_range_array.py:15

Traceback (most recent call last):
File "tests/test_range_array.py", line 15, in test_rf_multi_notrans
mag.set(mag.get() * 1000.0)
File "pyaml/arrays/magnet_array.py", line 30, in set
self.__aggregator.set(nvalue)
File "pyaml/control/abstract_impl.py", in CSStrengthScalarAggregator.set
raise PyAMLException(
pyaml.common.exception.PyAMLException: The values are out of range.

newHardwareValues:
[0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.,
0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., 0., ... 0., 0., 0.]

dev_range (flat list of bounds, min/max pairs):
[None, None, None, None, ...,
10.0, 109.0,
None, None, None, ...]

device list (DeviceAccessList):
[
Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-3:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', unit='A', range=None),
Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-3:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c05-a/current', unit='A', range=None),
...
Attribute(attribute='//ebs-simu-3:10000/srmag/vps-qf1/c05-a/current', unit='A', range=(10.0, 109.0)),
...
]

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T15:53:37Z

Still failing.

[ubuntu20acu.pons] > python tests/jlp_test.py 
22 Jan% 2026, 16:51:51 | WARNING | Tango control system binding for PyAML initialized with name 'live' and TANGO_HOST=ebs-simu-3:10000
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/esrf/pons/pyaml/tests/jlp_test.py", line 5, in <module>
    mag.set( mag.get()*1000.0 )
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/arrays/magnet_array.py", line 30, in set
    self.__aggregator.set(nvalue)
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/control/abstract_impl.py", line 168, in set
    if not check_range(newHardwareValues, dev_range):
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/operation/common/miniconda/envs/jlp-py312/lib/python3.12/site-packages/pyaml/control/abstract_impl.py", line 48, in check_range
    raise ValueError(f"dev_range must have an even length, got {r.size}")
ValueError: dev_range must have an even length, got 1

gupichon · 2026-01-22T15:57:49Z

Ok, it's strange. The error is in the implementation. get_range() returns None instead of an array. Even an array of None is ok but it must be an array with a correct number of elements.
Are you sure you have the good version of tango-pyaml (branch 28. pull request: python-accelerator-middle-layer/tango-pyaml#28) ?

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-22T16:17:23Z

OK it is better i was in branch 25.
So tomorrow I update pyaml-cs-oa.

Still this ?

    def set(self, value: float):
        available = self.__dev.check_device_availability()
        if not available:

gupichon · 2026-01-22T17:48:10Z

Still this ?

    def set(self, value: float):
        available = self.__dev.check_device_availability()
        if not available:

I missed this one.

gupichon · 2026-01-22T18:01:38Z

It should be ok now.

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-23T08:59:28Z

For me it is fine for now on the pyaml side.
However, some work needed to improve the error message.

tango-pyaml

The values are out of range: [110. .... 110.], [0.0, 108.0, .. 0.0, 120.0] for device MultiAttribute(attributes=[], name='', unit='', range=None)

pyaml-cs-oa

The values are out of range: [110. ... 110.], [0.0, 108.0 ... 0.0, 120.0] for device OAScalarAggregator(
TangoRW(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current', timeout_ms=3000, range=[10.0, 109.0], unit='A')
TangoRW(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c05-a/current', timeout_ms=3000, range=[10.0, 109.0], unit='A')
TangoRW(attribute='//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c05-e/current', timeout_ms=3000, range=[10.0, 109.0], unit='A')
...

It would be good to list out of range values according to their respective range and device.

i.e.

Values out of range:
110 A, '//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c04-e/current' [10.0, 109.0]
110 A, '//ebs-simu-2:10000/srmag/vps-qd2/c05-e/current' [10.0, 109.0]
...

gupichon · 2026-01-23T09:27:05Z

I agree, it requires another function to build a beautiful error message. I will do it now; it won’t take long, and the required tests are already there.

gupichon · 2026-01-23T09:59:18Z

I let you do a last review and it should be ok for merge.

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-23T10:08:55Z

OK it is fine. Thanks.
I just updated wrong OphydAsynch test files.
@simoneliuzzo , it is ok for you ?

JeanLucPons · 2026-01-23T10:18:05Z

May be you can update the version number as well.

gupichon · 2026-01-23T10:24:10Z

May be you can update the version number as well.

Ok, has there is no interface breaks, i'll update only the patch number.

gupichon-soleil added 2 commits January 16, 2026 11:24

New methods for range and device availability.

7a33e3d

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into 106-feature-add-setpo…

9260203

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

gupichon requested a review from JeanLucPons January 16, 2026 16:55

gupichon linked an issue Jan 16, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

Feature: Add setpoint check before applying strengths #106

Closed

gupichon marked this pull request as draft January 16, 2026 17:01

gupichon-soleil added 6 commits January 19, 2026 16:23

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into 106-feature-add-setpo…

9cfcc96

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

Test adaptation to the new DeviceAccess interface

ee124ea

First range check implementation. Need to add some tests.

1ce68dd

Ruff correction (and unused import)

d72d909

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into 106-feature-add-setpo…

37cdbdf

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

New tests for ranges in device access.

7a5aed7

Used in case of application of values on magnet arrays.

gupichon marked this pull request as ready for review January 21, 2026 14:02

gupichon-soleil added 2 commits January 22, 2026 14:47

Removing check of device availability. Adding range check for strengt…

7864bb8

…h aggregator.

Correction of a bug in case of no ranges

930db07

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into 106-feature-add-setpo…

4b2934f

…int-check-before-applying-strengths

gupichon-soleil added 2 commits January 22, 2026 16:28

Correction of a bug in case of no ranges. Adding a test.

663d7a2

Ruff correction

d2bdd38

Removing a call to check_device_availability

9e5e3c8

JeanLucPons previously approved these changes Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Better error message and better test.

c73aad3

gupichon dismissed JeanLucPons’s stale review via c73aad3 January 23, 2026 09:58

Removed wrong files

b3a81da

gupichon requested a review from simoneliuzzo January 23, 2026 10:10

gupichon self-assigned this Jan 23, 2026

Patch version bump

5ef8e50

JeanLucPons self-requested a review January 23, 2026 10:33

JeanLucPons approved these changes Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

gupichon merged commit 56bfb70 into main Jan 23, 2026
3 checks passed

106 feature add setpoint check before applying strengths #126

106 feature add setpoint check before applying strengths #126

Uh oh!

Conversation

gupichon commented Jan 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Related Issue

Uh oh!

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

JeanLucPons commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

gupichon commented Jan 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

gupichon commented Jan 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gupichon-soleil commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

JeanLucPons commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

JeanLucPons commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

JeanLucPons commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gupichon commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gupichon commented Jan 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading