Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001116
--- Comment #16 from Ilija Kocho <[email protected]> 2011-01-29 20:14:59 GMT --- It seem we've been working in parallel. You can skip my previous post (comment #15). (In reply to comment #14) > Ilija, at the least I would stop on this > > - lwip_net.cdl: > > cdl_option CYGSEM_LWIP_MEM_SECTION { > ... > flavor bool > default_value 0 > active_if CYGDAT_LWIP_MEM_SECTION_NAME > ... > } > > - lwipopts.h: > > #if CYGSEM_LWIP_MEM_SECTION > #include <cyg/infra/cyg_type.h> > #define MEM_SECTION CYGBLD_ATTRIB_SECTION(CYGDAT_LWIP_MEM_SECTION_NAME) > #else > #define MEM_SECTION > #endif > [SNIP] > > It seems to me you can enter some generic CDL component, for example, > component CYG{MEM, or HWR}_HAL_..._SECTION where you can manage also > generic data option (HAL, !LWIP) CYGDAT_HAL_..._SECTION_NAME. Why is > it? I think your idea to utilize all memory can be useful for other > applications too (not only lwIP package). - Right? > > Now, back to our distressful CYGDAT_LWIP_NET_SECTION_NAME data option. > This option in fact should be equal CYGDAT_HAL_..._SECTION_NAME data, > if lwIP package has been added (active_if CYGPKG_NET_LWIP). > > Just now I would not refer to Bug 1001114 here again if we just want to > get new lwIP option to manage the placement of memory pools, in fact, to > have a way for new definition, MEM_SECTION. Let's apply it and go ahead. > > What do you/others think? You're right, let's decouple this bug from Bug 1001114 and go on. Thanks for elaborate discussion. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
