Well yes i have protected the core just by using mutex and no message passing . Since i am porting it in Pnx1500/1700 so i think its closed source . I would see if i can provide a windows port to the community ,if its of some use. But for that i need to have well defines OS interfaces as well as documentation ,till then i dont see it would be helpful .
Best Regards ----- Original Message ----- From: "Goldschmidt Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mailing list for lwIP users" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 12:16 PM Subject: RE: [lwip-users] Sys_timeouts > > > Its bsd style socket api .Instead of comparing the current > > implementation with mine in terms of speed i would like them > > to be compared interms of simplicity. > > I think the current lwip bsd api layer is complex. But thats > > Me too! > > > my thinking and i may be wrong . The crux is that by > > implementing my own layer i have got more control and faith > > in lwip core . > > As I said before, I'd like to have a new socket layer, too. One > eliminating the use of the netconn API and maybe protecting the > core to be accesses from multiple threads, too. > > Do you have protected the core somehow or do you have a core > thread and message-passing configuration like the tcpip.c API > in lwIP? > Can you share that code or is it closed source? > > > Simon > > > _______________________________________________ > lwip-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
