A few months ago I did some work to port the latest stable LWIP to eCos.
Bug report: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001873
I'm trying to address the problems mentioned in comment 25, specifically
the ppp test not compiling.
PPP was one part that I didn't spend too
ug in bugzilla with the patches.
Getting late now, will tackle tomorrow.
On 27/06/2013 20:22, Will Wagner wrote:
Hello,
This patch series updates LWIP to 1.4.1. It seems to work well for us,
but we have not run all the tests or touched anything like all the
different config possibilities. Please
Some of my patches are too big for the mailing list, guess I'll just log
a bug in bugzilla with the patches.
Getting late now, will tackle tomorrow.
On 27/06/2013 20:22, Will Wagner wrote:
Hello,
This patch series updates LWIP to 1.4.1. It seems to work well for us,
but we have not ru
Add some casts to prevent compiler warnings
Signed-off-by: Andrew Parlane
Signed-off-by: Will Wagner
---
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/include/lwip/pbuf.h | 2 +-
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/src/core/ipv4/igmp.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a
There are a number of lwip cdl options which are only valid if
another option is selected. Add the relevant active_if statements
to the cdl file.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Parlane
Signed-off-by: Will Wagner
---
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/cdl/lwip_net.cdl | 16
1 file changed
There had been a couple of changes to lwip source files, these
changes need to be ported to the new version
Signed-off-by: Andrew Parlane
Signed-off-by: Will Wagner
---
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/src/core/mem.c | 2 +-
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/src/core/memp.c | 2 +-
2 files
There were a number of lwip API changes in 1.4.1, this patch
modifies the ecos wrapper around lwip so it works with new version
Signed-off-by: Andrew Parlane
Signed-off-by: Will Wagner
---
.../enc424j600/current/tests/netconn_test_server.c | 7 +-
packages/net/lwip_tcpip/current/cdl
Hello,
This patch series updates LWIP to 1.4.1. It seems to work well for us,
but we have not run all the tests or touched anything like all the
different config possibilities. Please test and give feedback.
This patch series is generated from git (whatever happened to moving
away from cvs
removed.
- drop all ppp changes and go with vanilla 1.4.1 ppp implementation
- drop lwip tests and keep the current ecos ones
- apply patches/changes made to 1.3.2 for ecos and all patches since to
1.4.1
- follow upgrading instructions for lwip. This will involve a few new
cdl options and chang
to get PPP running in sequential (non-threaded) mode, as the code in 1.3
was not fit for the task and we used eCos on a pretty limited platform
where we did not want to afford the overhead of using lwIP in threaded
mode. Also there might have been some additions to allow writing PPP
dumps in orde
Hi Will
I am sure an upgrade of the eCos lwIP stack to the latest stable
upstream release would be welcomed by many eCos users.
On 01/05/13 19:37, Will Wagner wrote:
> Have started looking at the difference between upstream 1.3.2 and what
> is check in to ecos. There are quite a
Will,
I was not around when this was ported, but I have an LwIP application with
SNMP, Telnet, FTP, and HTTP, and I would be willing to test and help with some
debugging. I think getting this updated is very high value.
Mike
On May 1, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Will Wagner wrote:
> We
We are interested in updating to lwip 1.4.1. Has anyone already done any
work on this?
Have started looking at the difference between upstream 1.3.2 and what
is check in to ecos. There are quite a lot of differences, although most
of them are trivial renaming.
Does anyone know what changes
Hi John, Simon
On 08.05.2011 09:36, John Dallaway wrote:
> Hi Simon
>
> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>
>> Over the weekend I did initial work of an lwIP
>> 1.4.x port. I think by the time of an official 1.4.x release, I will be
>> able to provide an updated port for eCo
On 05/18/2011 07:18 AM, Elad Yosef wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have ported the FTP client to work with LwIP and I want to
> contribute it.
> The Client supports only IPv4
> The hostname must be the IP address of the server.
> The temporary buffer is allocated on the calling thread
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Over the weekend I did initial work of an lwIP
> 1.4.x port. I think by the time of an official 1.4.x release, I will be
> able to provide an updated port for eCos. In the meantime, people can
> use the 1.3.2 port.
lwIP 1.4.0 has now been released,
changes have already been accepted
upstream?
Well, yesterday night I have checked the lwip HEAD, and it looks like
there has been lots of work done in the ppp departement. It now supports
polling and multi-threaded support out of the box. So it might be
considerable to directly use the
t;>>> for the CVS check-in. Unless your changes have already been accepted
>>>> upstream?
>>>>
>>> Well, yesterday night I have checked the lwip HEAD, and it looks like
>>> there has been lots of work done in the ppp departement. It now supports
John Dallaway schrieb:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
John Dallaway schrieb:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Ok, I merged the 1.3.2 stable code and did a few quick tests (the
changes are not huge). The tarball is at
http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20100122.tar.gz
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John Dallaway schrieb:
>> Hi Simon
>>
>> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, I merged the 1.3.2 stable code and did a few quick tests (the
>>> changes are not huge). The tarball is at
>>> http://download
John Dallaway schrieb:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Ok, I merged the 1.3.2 stable code and did a few quick tests (the
changes are not huge). The tarball is at
http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20100122.tar.gz
Some initial comments based mainly on diffs against the upstream lwIP
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Ok, I merged the 1.3.2 stable code and did a few quick tests (the
> changes are not huge). The tarball is at
> http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20100122.tar.gz
Some initial comments based mainly on diffs against the upstream lwIP
1.3.2 sources and the
John Dallaway wrote:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Hi John,
Hi Ganesh
Nice to hear that you are using the lwip stack and it is working fine
for you. Currently, I hold the lwip code in my own git repo, shared with
other changes I have done to eCos. The plan was to get my current lwip
code
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Hi John,
> Hi Ganesh
>
> Nice to hear that you are using the lwip stack and it is working fine
> for you. Currently, I hold the lwip code in my own git repo, shared with
> other changes I have done to eCos. The plan was to get my current lwip
&
Hi John,
Hi Ganesh
Nice to hear that you are using the lwip stack and it is working fine
for you. Currently, I hold the lwip code in my own git repo, shared with
other changes I have done to eCos. The plan was to get my current lwip
code into the CVS. John, I think it's about time to get
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John Dallaway wrote:
>
>> Excellent. I would like to push through with final review and get your
>> lwIP port checked in to CVS, replacing the existing lwIP 1.1.1 port. Is
>> lwip-20091027.tar.gz still current or do you have further
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John Dallaway wrote:
>
>> Excellent. I would like to push through with final review and get your
>> lwIP port checked in to CVS, replacing the existing lwIP 1.1.1 port. Is
>> lwip-20091027.tar.gz still current or do you have further
sh through with final review and get your
lwIP port checked in to CVS, replacing the existing lwIP 1.1.1 port. Is
lwip-20091027.tar.gz still current or do you have further changes?
Should I be comparing your package with the upstream lwIP 1.3.1 sources
or is it now closer to lwIP 1.3.2 RC1?
Sor
y CYGFUN_LWIP_SHOW_NETIF_CONFIG which is now enabled by
> default.
Excellent. I would like to push through with final review and get your
lwIP port checked in to CVS, replacing the existing lwIP 1.1.1 port. Is
lwip-20091027.tar.gz still current or do you have further changes?
Should I be com
John Dallaway wrote:
I would recommend a "radio button" approach for mutually exclusive modes
which have associated source files. Something like:
cdl_interface CYGINT_LWIP_MODES {
display "Enabled lwIP modes"
no_define
requires 1 == CYGINT_LWIP_MODES
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John Dallaway wrote:
>> Hi Simon
>>
>> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>
>>>> The lwIP CDL script currently builds ecos/sio.c unconditionally so
>>>> CYGPKG_IO_SERIAL is required even when both PPP and SLIP are disabled
John Dallaway wrote:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
The lwIP CDL script currently builds ecos/sio.c unconditionally so
CYGPKG_IO_SERIAL is required even when both PPP and SLIP are disabled.
It would be good to compile ecos/sio.c via a CDL option which is
"calculated { CYGPKG_LWI
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
>> The lwIP CDL script currently builds ecos/sio.c unconditionally so
>> CYGPKG_IO_SERIAL is required even when both PPP and SLIP are disabled.
>> It would be good to compile ecos/sio.c via a CDL option which is
>> "calculated { CYGPKG
John Dallaway wrote:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Testing on real hardware would be especially useful. Also testing on
big-endian targets might reveal some issues, as I've only been testing
on little-endian platforms.
Using your sources from lwip-20090827.tar.gz, I was able to buil
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Testing on real hardware would be especially useful. Also testing on
> big-endian targets might reveal some issues, as I've only been testing
> on little-endian platforms.
Using your sources from lwip-20090827.tar.gz, I was able to build and
run th
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 09:18:23AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> In the meantime I have successfully committed my SLIP polling support to
> the lwip CVS, so it will be included in 1.4. I have also updated my port
> with these now official changes and did some testing. The ne
Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:38:42AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:08:20PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
Hi
I have done a new lwip test release with the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:38:42AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:08:20PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:38:42AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
>> I retried nc master/slave test with your template and suggested pbuf
>> values. For synthetic (I used tap interface) I got good results with
>> lwIP, but, for real target, nc test p
Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:08:20PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
Hi
I have done a new lwip test release with the following changes:
* incorporated Sergei's patch (ctrl-c support)
* added an lwip_eth_s
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:08:20PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I have done a new lwip test release with the following changes:
> >
> > * incorporated Sergei's patch (ctrl-c s
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have done a new lwip test release with the following changes:
>
> * incorporated Sergei's patch (ctrl-c support)
> * added an lwip_eth_simple and lwip_eth_sequential template
>
> The new test r
Hi
I have done a new lwip test release with the following changes:
* incorporated Sergei's patch (ctrl-c support)
* added an lwip_eth_simple and lwip_eth_sequential template
The new test release can be downloaded from
http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20090825.tar.gz
To do synth tes
Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:43:36PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:12:02AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
Hi
If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been updated with the l
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:43:36PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:12:02AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
> > the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been upda
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:12:02AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Hi
>
> If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
> the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been updated with the latest changes from
> the 1.3.1 release. I currently left in my changes f
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, John Dallaway wrote:
> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>
>> If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
>> the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been updated with the latest changes from
>> the 1.3.1 release. I currently left i
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
> the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been updated with the latest changes from
> the 1.3.1 release. I currently left in my changes for SLIP and PPP (see
> my last mail for details), bu
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> I have updated my lwIP package with the final 1.3.1 release. There are
> changes in two areas, and I wonder how to tackle them:
>
> 1. SLIP polling support
>
> I changed the SLIP netif to support polling, so it does not need to run
> in
Hi
If anyone volunteers, I'd be glad if you could test the current state of
the lwip 1.3.1 port. It has been updated with the latest changes from
the 1.3.1 release. I currently left in my changes for SLIP and PPP (see
my last mail for details), but this should not matter for testing
Hi John
I have updated my lwIP package with the final 1.3.1 release. There are
changes in two areas, and I wonder how to tackle them:
1. SLIP polling support
I changed the SLIP netif to support polling, so it does not need to run
in it's own thread when resources are low. I submitte
big-endian target?
Hello John, Simon
Unfortunately, I ran in some issues when I tried lwip-20090722 on ARM
http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2009-07/msg00223.html It was
not possible to build lwip tests because new package had not a few
interface functions are used by io/eth/lwip/current
John Dallaway wrote:
Hi Simon and all
Simon Kallweit wrote:
John Dallaway schrieb:
Having reviewed the lwIP ChangeLog, I think it makes sense to simply
replace the older lwIP port in the eCos CVS trunk (tagging the
repository before the commit). There are known issues with lwIP PPP
which
ndian target?
Hello John, Simon
Unfortunately, I ran in some issues when I tried lwip-20090722 on ARM
http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2009-07/msg00223.html It was
not possible to build lwip tests because new package had not a few
interface functions are used by io/eth/lwip/current/s
Hi Simon and all
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John Dallaway schrieb:
>
>> Having reviewed the lwIP ChangeLog, I think it makes sense to simply
>> replace the older lwIP port in the eCos CVS trunk (tagging the
>> repository before the commit). There are known issues with lwIP
John Dallaway schrieb:
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
lwip is close to the 1.3.1 release, and I think this will be the time
to get the new port into the eCos repository, so any testing is highly
appreciated.
lwIP 1.3.1 was finally released today.
Yes, I've read it o
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> lwip is close to the 1.3.1 release, and I think this will be the time
> to get the new port into the eCos repository, so any testing is highly
> appreciated.
lwIP 1.3.1 was finally released today.
In view of the known issues with the older eCos lwIP 1
MaxiD wrote:
Hello Simon,
I get errors with mboxes with older versions so I would test your port.
Would you please send me the link to your port??
I put a snapshot up:
http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20090722.tar.gz
I'm glad for any feedback. lwip is close to the 1.3.1 release,
Simon Kallweit wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> It's time for a little status update on the lwIP 1.3.x port. Let me give
> you a little list of what has been done lately:
>
> * CDL should include every configuration option offered by lwIP now, was
> reviewed by John Dall
Hi
It's time for a little status update on the lwIP 1.3.x port. Let me give
you a little list of what has been done lately:
* CDL should include every configuration option offered by lwIP now, was
reviewed by John Dallaway and got restructured and cleaned up afterwards.
* Implem
Hi
I just wanted to give a quick update on my work on the lwIP 1.3 port.
The following things have been done since last post:
* Cleaned up the CDL: I added a few top level categories to the CDL like
APIs, Protocols and Interfaces. I also added some more constraints and
dependencies. I think
lue" instead of "default_value"?
No, calculated_value would not let the user configure lwIP to use the
internal allocator when memalloc is available. But I think there are
scenarios where this is feasible, as it keeps all allocations for lwIP
in a "safe place", not mixi
John Dallaway wrote:
> There's some scope for improving the dependency info. For example,
> CYGIMP_LWIP_MEMP_MEM_MALLOC could specify:
>
>requires { CYGINT_ISO_MEMALLOC != 0 }
>default_value { CYGINT_ISO_MEMALLOC != 0 }
>
Shouldn't it use "calculated_value" instead of "default_value"?
Che
and options just a little more verbose. For example:
"DHCP" -> "DHCP support"
"ICMP" -> "ICMP support"
and so on.
Done.
There are currently 27 items directly under the lwIP package node in the
tree. Perhaps there is some scope for further grouping
t;DHCP" -> "DHCP support"
"ICMP" -> "ICMP support"
and so on.
There are currently 27 items directly under the lwIP package node in the
tree. Perhaps there is some scope for further grouping of these nodes to
give the tree more depth and less breadth. F
John Dallaway wrote:
* sys.h: Added an include. I don't know if this really is necessary.
Will check with the lwIP mailing list.
* init.c: Removed a check for PPP in NO_SYS mode, which is not valid
with my current PPP changes.
* ppp: I did some work on the PPP code, added polling support,
[ moving to the ecos-devel list ]
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> John reminded my about our endeavor to upgrade the lwIP stack to an
> up-to-date version. I took a little time to upgrade my port to the CVS
> HEAD from yesterday. So everything should be cutting edge.
Excellent!
>
John Dallaway wrote:
b) Compatibility with eCos applications using the existing eCos lwIP
1.1.1 package if possible (API and existing CDL option names
preserved)
Hmm, I didn't really focus on that. I agree that CDL names should be
identical as far as possible. Otherwise I&
Hi Simon
Simon Kallweit wrote:
>> In a perfect world, it would be great to see:
>>
>> a) Support for all functionality of lwIP 1.3.0 (including ethernet, PPP,
>>IPv4, IPv6, raw API, sequential API, BSD socket API)
>
> Well, I think we might probably work wit
John Dallaway wrote:
This looks like an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the benefits of
our free open source development model.
In a perfect world, it would be great to see:
a) Support for all functionality of lwIP 1.3.0 (including ethernet, PPP,
IPv4, IPv6, raw API, sequential API
Hi John and Simon
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 11:44 +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Anyone interested in my code may have a look at
> http://git.inthemill.ch/?p=ecos.git;a=summary
>
> I think it would be great to update the official lwip port in ecos and
> I'm willing to help wh
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 11:44 +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
> I just wanted to let you know that I have done an lwip 1.3.0 port for
> our current project too. I haven't committed anything yet as the port is
> not yet finished. I have re-written parts of the CDL, rewritten the
>
John Dallaway wrote:
Hi John and Simon
John Eigelaar wrote:
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:49 -0500, Frank Pagliughi wrote:
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
Hello,
are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a
Hi John and Simon
John Eigelaar wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:49 -0500, Frank Pagliughi wrote:
>> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>>> Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> are there pl
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:49 -0500, Frank Pagliughi wrote:
> Simon Kallweit wrote:
> > Simon Kallweit wrote:
> >> Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
>
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
Hello,
are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
I was planning on doing that, if it's not already planned for the
ecos 3.0 release. I don't know if eCosCentric has a more u
Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> Simon Kallweit wrote:
>> Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
>> I was planning on doing that, if it's not already planned for the ecos
>&
Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
>
> I was planning on doing that, if it's not already planned for the ecos
> 3.0 release. I don't know if eCosCentr
Simon Kallweit wrote:
Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
Hello,
are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
I was planning on doing that, if it's not already planned for the ecos
3.0 release. I don't know if eCosCentric has a more up-to-date port.
I'm
Frank J. Beckmann wrote:
Hello,
are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
I was planning on doing that, if it's not already planned for the ecos
3.0 release. I don't know if eCosCentric has a more up-to-date port. I'm
currently working on a
Hello,
are there plans for updating eCos' lwIP port to a more recent version?
--
Bye
Frank
81 matches
Mail list logo
