feat(behavior_path_planner): define DrivableAreaInfo and commonize generateDrivableArea

[takayuki5168]

Description

Currently, a drivable area is created in each module.
With a new architecture, since multiple modules can be launched simultaneously, in some cases concatenating drivable area from multiple modules is required, which is difficult to do.
Temporarily the specific implementation for concatenating the drivable area form lane_change, avoidance, and pull_out is used now.

To handle this module-specific temporary implementation, with this PR, the drivable area is created as follows.

• Each module creates the drivable_area_info, which is an abstract information of generating the drivable area.

// NOTE: To deal with some policies about drivable area generation, currently DrivableAreaInfo is
// quite messy. Needs to be refactored.
struct DrivableAreaInfo
{
  std::vector<DrivableLanes> drivable_lanes;
  std::vector<tier4_autoware_utils::Polygon2d> obstacle_polys;

  // temporary only for pull over's freespace planning
  double drivable_margin{0.0};

  // temporary only for side shiftEdit
  bool is_already_expanded{false};
};

• Then, in the last part of behavior_path_planner, the drivable_area_info is converted to the drivable area and put into the output path.
• NOTE:
  • For the old architecture, each module put the drivable area into the output path as well.
  • Side shift and pull over's free space planner has different policies for generating the drivable area. Therefore, DrivableAreaInfo has specific variables for them.

I confirmed that the drivable area is generated correctly.

pull out

lane change

external lane change

pull over (not freespace)

pull over (freespace)

pull out + avoidance

Related links

Tests performed

• planning simulator
• scenario sim
  • old architecture
    • 1326/1330
    • https://evaluation.tier4.jp/evaluation/reports/bfef7045-e3ba-5ed4-975a-fb47db56953b?project_id=prd_jt
    • Intersection is unstable. No regression with this PR.
  • new architecture
    • 1318/1330
    • https://evaluation.tier4.jp/evaluation/reports/80f66c44-a8ee-5faa-ab82-5f92fc9308b5?project_id=prd_jt
    • There is additional fail compared to the following, but 2 of them are random failure. No regression with this PR.
      • https://evaluation.tier4.jp/evaluation/reports/a70d79a4-dc92-5f04-843e-ab353dcc8e74?project_id=prd_jt

Notes for reviewers

Interface changes

Nothing

Effects on system behavior

Nothing

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

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

• I've confirmed the contribution guidelines.
• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.
• The PR has been properly tested.
• The PR has been reviewed by the code owners.

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.
• The PR is ready for merge.

After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -0.84 ⚠️

Comparison is base (2894c4b) 14.97% compared to head (aef2539) 14.13%.

❗ Current head aef2539 differs from pull request most recent head 6812d12. Consider uploading reports for the commit 6812d12 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3444      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   14.97%   14.13%   -0.84%     
==========================================
  Files        1301     1413     +112     
  Lines       92057    98983    +6926     
  Branches    29049    29611     +562     
==========================================
+ Hits        13788    13994     +206     
- Misses      63598    70169    +6571     
- Partials    14671    14820     +149     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	15.35% <0.00%> (?)
total	14.11% <ø> (-0.87%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 534d93c

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...ner/include/behavior_path_planner/data_manager.hpp	46.66% <0.00%> (-3.34%)	⬇️
.../include/behavior_path_planner/planner_manager.hpp	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...th_planner/scene_module/scene_module_interface.hpp	34.10% <0.00%> (-0.82%)	⬇️
...nner/scene_module/side_shift/side_shift_module.hpp	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ude/behavior_path_planner/utils/avoidance/util.hpp	∅ <ø> (∅)
...nner/include/behavior_path_planner/utils/utils.hpp	45.45% <0.00%> (-54.55%)	⬇️
...er/src/scene_module/avoidance/avoidance_module.cpp	3.44% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
...lanner/src/scene_module/avoidance_by_lc/module.cpp	0.00% <ø> (ø)
.../scene_module/goal_planner/goal_planner_module.cpp	14.78% <0.00%> (-0.37%)	⬇️
...planner/src/scene_module/lane_change/interface.cpp	16.19% <0.00%> (-0.16%)	⬇️
... and 8 more

... and 127 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.