The article makes it sound like after the missed frame, every subsequent frame had the wrong timestamp and was processed wrong, so it sounds like more of a bug. If the subsequent timestamps had the right timestamps, and the calculation was based on delta timestamps, then it would basically basically interpolate over the missing frame and then recover. The fact that every subsequent frame was assumed to be 33ms in the past was the issue here.
And that being a system boundary thing, it’s easy to imagine it as an integration issue, where the controls side maybe assumed it would get a dummy frame or something.
