Ahh, never thought of the "unexpected" packets. I learn a little more each day.
--- On Thu, 8/13/09, Kieran Mansley <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kieran Mansley <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Why so many pbufs required? To: "Mailing list for lwIP users" <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, August 13, 2009, 9:22 AM On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 04:09 -0700, JM wrote: You're assuming that the stack will only receive packets for your application. In most networks this is not true - there will be a fair number of broadcasts, and other stuff that your application will never see. These will still be passed to the stack, and each will use (at least) one PBUF_POOL pbuf. There may be other things, such as TCP ACKs for any data you send, that also come in as separate packets and each use PBUF_POOL pbufs. Chris's point about using more-but-smaller pbufs in the pool is a good one. It will mean you might get away with less memory and fewer dropped packets, at the cost of a little extra overhead for the chaining. Kieran _______________________________________________ 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
