Artem Pisarenko wrote:
During last days I've prepared workaround which should work for most
cases. It assumes that application will not delete or reconfigure
assigned interfaces during runtime (also DHCP isn't allowed, although
it's allowed on 32bit systems where netif-ip_addr change is
Firedog I. wrote:
Thanks a lot to all of you for your answers. I changed it to
int* data = 0xFF;
tcp_write(pcb, data,1,1);
and now it works just perfect. I get a single byte as data in the TCP
Packet with an ff.
Just my 2 cents on this: do read up on endianess! The code you posted above is
Carr, Anthony wrote:
I have an application based upon lwIP v1.3.1 without an RTOS
[..]
I have traced the cause of the lock-up as an infinite loop in tcp_fasttmr
where pcb and pcb-next are the same location.
[..]
I have looked through the archives and seen that other people have had the
same
Ivan Delamer wrote:
It's been stable for me and it's been a while since I've received any bug
reports through savannah or offline by personal email.
Maybe it could be a BETA release? (pre-RC?)
Yes, that would be a good idea in this phase, I guess. I see what I can do :-)
Simon
Sanchayan wrote:
I have got a connection running in listening mode on a particular port. For
giving Dynamic DNS provision, i need to change the port number of my
listening connection at run time. I tried tcp_bind, but, it returns
ERR_ISCONN -13 Already connected.
You can't change
Matthias Wieloch wrote:
I use lwip-1.3.2 with FreeRTOS 6.0.3 on a SAM7X512 for a while now and
recently it happens that the Ethernet connection gets lost after some
undetermined run time.
I'm pinging the device while operation now and when I loose connection I see
that I receive no ping
Måns Andersson wrote:
I'm using lwip 1.4.0 and have problems with that the write() function
locks up and never returns, which is by the book since I'm using blocking
sockets. But I don't want the thread to be locked up forever, but rather
returned after some fixed amount of time on error, just
RCube wrote:
I'm using lwIP in an attempt to set up a simple webserver. (Initially it
is
only expected to support GET requests and can assume no Keep-Alive or
pipelining is used) As a base I used the HTTP Server based on the TCP Raw
api written by Adam Dunkels himself.
Did he actually write
Sylvain Rochet wrote:
Thanks, where you say it uses a pseudo network interface that somehow
passes raw ethernet packets, what do you mean by somehow; is this
functionality provided by lwip, or do I need to do the lwip to raw
ethernet packet interface?
The unix port uses the TUN/TAP
A G utopian...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi
I am wanting to use lwip with ethernet in linux. In a previous message
here
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lwip-users/2007-03/msg8.html
it says you would need to integrate the device drivers with lwip (in
ethernetif.c I presume).
My device is
Khale, Swati IN BOM SL wrote:
Could you please let me know whether support for outgoing VLAN tags also
is available in lwip ? From the mail traffic (refer
http://www.mail-archive.com/lwip-users@nongnu.org/msg10419.html), I
understand that this may be
available in Version 1.5.0, which is not
Jelena Frtunik wrote:
[..]
static void ethernetif_input( void * pvParameters )
{
[..]
switch (htons(ethhdr-type))
{
/* IP packet? */
case 256:
case ETHTYPE_IP:
/* full packet send to tcpip_thread
to process */
if (s_pxNetIf-input(p, s_pxNetIf) != ERR_OK)
{
Jelena Frtunik wrote:
Is this correct? Or should i do sth more?
That's all I meant, yes. Does it still work with these changes? :-)
One stupid question where can see the skeleton ethernetif.c.
In the lwIP sources in 'src/netif/ethernetif.c' (besides 'etharp.c' and
'slipif.c').
Simon
Jelena Frtunik wrote:
It behaves the same with the changes. :(
That's OK, I didn't think the changes I suggested would help you. Instead, they
protect you from having more problems in the future :-)
Any further tips what the problem can be? Can you help me to modify the
code as Mark Lakata
Jelena Frtunik wrote:
Are there any timing constraints in the LWIp when a TCP packet is handeld
by the stack?
No.
How much time is needed for a TCP packet to be processed?
That totally depends on the compiler, processor and its speed. But TCP is not a
simple protocol and handling a TCP
Anil kumar wrote:
I am using lwip version 1.4.0
As per my understanding of lwip, the transmitting and receiving paths
works
in two different threads. Both of them uses some locking mechanism before
entering the core.
This is only true for LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING==1, which is not the
Anil kumar wrote:
Yes, i am using lwip with LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING=1.
How to use the default one, is it the same code base with different
options
or is it completely a different code base?
It's a compile-time option only.
Regarding the crash, i am getting kernel oops with the message
Anil kumar wrote:
Please let me know if any one is able to use multi-threaded netconn api in
cases where do_writemore returns ERR_MEM.
Last time I checked this certainly worked. What version of lwIP are you using
and what do you mean when you say the other thread cannot access the dataptr?
vincent cui wrote:
Does LWIP support DNS server ? I need know the real ip address by web site
name input by user .
Yes. See dns.h (raw API), api.h (netconn_gethostbyname) or netdb.h (socket API).
Simon
___
lwip-users mailing list
Richard Barry wrote:
Some replies to FreeRTOS-MPU topics, rather than lwIP topics. A little
off topic for this mailing list I think
It is off topic, but nevertheless interesting (to me).
[..]
The kernel is privileged, so can access the task stacks, it has to store
the task contexts and
girrian seedo girrian.se...@gmail.com wrote:
I had a problem when I was trying to memcpy p-payload directly into a
systems memory. I tried to do it as below.
No idea what's going wrong there. There are so many unknown identifiers
(variables or defines?) in the code you passed that it's
Marco Jakobs l...@piwos.de wrote:
just a short question: Is there any way to alter the TOS field (for QoS
taaging) of an UDP packet before it's finally sent out with
'netconn_sendto'? For example writing into the netconn structure etc.?
No. Changing TOS is implemented on pcb-level (pcb-tos)
Tomáš Švec tomas.sve...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the quick answer. By ISR you mean an interrupt routine? In that
case it is correct, since the event polling kind of replaces interrupts.
Yes.
I also implemented low_level_output, but it seems to be called only from the
etharp.c file.
Tomáš Švec wrote:
The problem is, in that case, I need to call ethernetif_input
manually when I receive the package, right? In case it is right,
ethernetif_input is a static function, which does not allow me to use it
outside its translation unit. Is it safe to remove the static attribute,
Dan-Angel Codrean d.codr...@energymicro.com wrote:
I managed to make the lwIP port for an EFM32 developement kit and I would
like to put it out there so that others can benefit from it.
Can you please tell me how should I proceed in putting it in the contrib
repository?
Ports are only
Maybe I'm confused but I think this is both a forum and a mailing list
linked
together.
No, savannah has its own archives of its mailing lists:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lwip-users/
I don't think that nabble is related to savannah (given the .com TLD). I don't
know nabble, but to
Martin Velek martin.ve...@gmail.com wrote:
has anyone tried to port libmicrohttpd to LWIP and FreeRTOS?
I haven't, but I'd be interested to hear of it once you try it. I'd imagine it
could also be ported to lwIP's OS abstraction layer if FreeRTOS works...
Simon
Krzysztof Wesołowski kwes...@kwesoly.net wrote:
If u use separate threa
thera are netifapi_* variants of functions which uses messages with
call back to pass execution to tcpip thread.
Or use 'tcpip_callback()' to call a self-created function in the context of
tcpip_thread which in turn
jblackarty d...@oniip.ru wrote:
1. How to make driver to be notified when application sets it's interface
up/down ? It's needed to remove unnecessary system load by disabling
transmit path in hardware. There are LWIP_NETIF_STATUS_CALLBACK and
LWIP_NETIF_LINK_CALLBACK capabilities exist but
jblackarty d...@oniip.ru wrote:
Issues #1 and #3 are still open.
See my last mail (2.5 hours ago) about these (short summary: #1 can currently
not be fixed, #3 is already fixed in git).
Simon
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
H.A. hansatter...@hotmail.com wrote:
Connection didn't open and no tcp output, nothing visible in Wireshark.
OK,
the open is a non-blocking command so it might take a certain amount of
time for it to open. But it doesn't feel right to sit and wait for the
connection to open inside an
Hassan Mansouri hassan...@yahoo.com wrote:
I am looking for a suitable TCP/IP stack for STM32F207 with the following
features ina commercial product:
* no OS option
* multiple TCP/IP connection simultaniously
* web-server
* UDP
So far so good: lwIP may be freely used in commercial
Krzysztof Wesołowski kwes...@kwesoly.net wrote:
I am receiving POST data with netconn api, its matter of reception
logic, not used api. You must add POST request support to your server,
starting with initial request line and using content sent after
headers.
Have a look at the raw-API httpd
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
Now, I have written web server with socket API, which support POST and GET
.
But it can't accept POST request with socket when file upload, I capture
it with wireshark, it captures it in TCP level, not HTTP level
Reading that post, you might not
Chen c...@dataq.com wrote:
I use lwip_send (0), along with FreeRTOS on AVR32, to send out TCP
packets
Each time I call, I present 200 bytes to lwip. From Wireshark, I can
see the packets size alternating between 200 and 1400 bytes with more
idle time right before the 1400-byte packet
Marco Jakobs l...@piwos.de wrote:
[..]
3. Try to connect to the remote host
err = netconn_connect
(ssrv_netconn[ssrv_conn[f].netconn[0]-1].conn, ssrv_addr, port);
// Verbindung öffnen
err returns as -4 (in progress)
As the host is not running a
Kieran Mansley kie...@recoil.org wrote:
On 20 Jul 2012, at 15:35, vincent cui wrote:
Hi:
I use socket api to do that.
Is it possible that the old socket is just in the TCP TIME_WAIT state, and
will be cleared up after a short while? If you're calling close() on your
sockets,
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
I check other production. The production Ethernet led is off, then on
again
That looks like they would simply save the changed configuration (e.g. to
flash) and reboot (so the new configuration is loaded after the reboot).
You can of course do it
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
My Questions are:
Would this crash the system in future if the TCP_TMR_INTERVAl is set so
high? What would happen if i dont use the tcpip_tcp_timer in a longtme
runing system?
You should not need to change the interval of the TCP timers in the first
place.
q...@gmx.de wrote:
You can get the current version from git:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/lwip/lwip-contrib.git
[..]
From having a look into the code I'd guess that doesn't works with 1.3.x?
Hmm, I don't know. It should compile without too many changes. Maybe you need
to change
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
I know that you are criticizing me but i am new to this field and hope you
have understanding for it
That wasn't criticism. I haven't really followed this thread, but it seemed
like you had changed the TCP timer interval, which is normally not a good idea
Pomeroy, Marty martypome...@novabio.com wrote:
The TCP_TMR_INTERVAL is the time the stack should wait for an ACK from
my master, right?
Yes, before it re-transmits.
Is that so? I would have thought that slow-retransmission depends on the
connection's RTO (which is normally an order of
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
LWIP is the slave which response!
Just to rule out any uncertainties, this would be 192.168.0.222 in your
captures (that would be the info requested, simply put)?
In that case, how can you change the tcp timer interval of the master? Or isn't
that what you
Angel CODREAN acjunkma...@gmail.com wrote:
netif_add(netif, ipaddr, netmask, gw, NULL, LWIP_driver_init,
LWIP_driver_input);
I think the last argument should be 'tcpip_input', to feed the packets into the
stack, not 'LWIP_driver_input' (which I assume is a function in your
ethernetif.c
Fred39 wrote:
Ok i found the problem, both netifs had similar ip configuration same
subnet which was the problem thus the packets where send to the first netif
in the list :)
Is this behaviour specified somewhere ?
Yes, this is intended behaviour specified in IPv4 routing. I don't remember
Funk, Artur artur.f...@iq-wireless.com wrote:
I was going to enable AUTOIP in case DHCP fails, but after adding the
Options to the lwipopt.h
#define LWIP_DHCP 1
#define LWIP_AUTOIP 1
#define LWIP_DHCP_AUTOIP_COOP 1
autoip.c Source
Åke Forslund ake.forsl...@nibe.se wrote:
I'm not quite sure how to handle the situation since when using blocking
sockets lwip_read() doesn't return even if the link goes down (? is this
expected behavior?)
A link-down event shouldn't cause read() to abort, I guess, since you could
re-plug
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
Like i said it works fine only when i start dhcp_start from my application
thread while locking the scheduler, without tcpip_callback.
Locking the scheduler is not enough, as lwIP's tcpip_thread might be in the
middle of something when you just lock the
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
I tried it by calling the tcpip_callback(dhcp_start(netif_default),0)
function in my application thread but it did not worked.
Did you even read the answer Marty wrote yesterday? The way you are using
tcpip_callback() suggests a) that you might want to learn a
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
I am trying to write a function which allows me to change between DHCP and
static Ip. This function will be in my application thread, so not in the
tcpip thread.
Simply don't do that. Use tcpip_callback() instead to get from the application
thread into
Fred39 haydar.oe...@web.de wrote:
i am using Ecos 2.x with the lwip Port of Ecos 3.0. The Lwip Stack version
is 1.1.1 last changelog is 2009-03-12 splipif.
That's a least strange: lwIP 1.1.1 is from Jan-2005!
As to the netconn problem, it sounds like threading doesn't work correctly,
which
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
If I understand correctly, you're saying that nothing should be
done either to detect the address conflict in the stack?
I think the best solution would be to detect an address conflict but to let the
user react on it: after all, the assignment has been manually
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
the fastest way for you would probably
be to just intercept ARP responses where they are passed to DHCP and
handle them yourself.
If I write a detection routine, it can't be in dhcp.c, because that
file might not even be compiled (LWIP_DCHP == 0).
I
Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com wrote:
With loss of link being fatal, we stop but we want the PC to reconnect as
quickly as possible and not leave anything taking up resources from the
previous connection.
Bill, I don't want to be picky about this, but I would have thought that trying
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
If LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING is 0, tcpip_netifapi looks
fairly similar to tcpip_callback_with_block.
Does netifapi make sense when LWIP_TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING is 1,
in which case there is no message passing, the operation is
done within the calling context holding
Martin Osterloh mosterloh1...@gmail.com wrote:
I was wondering how lwIP actually knows which packet it has to deliver to
which process? Is there some kind of internal structure?
LwIP is normally not used with multiple processes. It is used in smaller
embedded systems, where their can be
Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com wrote:
Ok then, why isn't it public? How do I abandon a tcp_pcb without any
further activity on it and releasing it ASAP. This is a real-time embedded
system - loss of link is fatal.
I guess because it hasn't been needed, yet. Why do your need to
Kieran Mansley kie...@recoil.org wrote:
Why don't we get this pushed into the default branch of the git repo so that
others can experiment with it.
That would be great! If 2.4.x really fixes bugs where we found them, that
overrides the argument of staying with the 2.3.x code base because of
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
AFAIU, mutexes do not make a system immune to priority inversion.
Consider 3 processes of increasing priority L, M, H.
Suppose L locks a mutex; then H waits for the mutex; then M starts
running and preempts L : H will never run, as long as M runs.
That's
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
I use the following code to receive file from client tool, the receive
speed will be up to down after send 3 times .
Is it LWIP bug ?
How in the world is this question related to the summary of your post??? Isn't
that the same question you asked in
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
Yes, they are same ...
I am confused that nobody meet this kind of problem
Still, please just don't re-post (and do keep the summary in sync with a post's
content). You risk annoying people with this behaviour and as a result you will
get even less
Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com wrote:
As a general advisory, I'm with on that, Kieran.
However, I think Bill's way might be correct in his very special case
here: calling tcp_recved from the receive callback without freeing the
received pbuf does not hurt the stack. The only problem
Karlsson, Johnny johnny.karls...@assaabloy.com wrote:
There doesn't seem to be a way to detect that a remote host sends a RST
message when using non blocking read.
That doesn't depend on blocking or nonblocking, it's the way the socket API is
defined. When a receive function returns:
- 0, the
Karlsson, Johnny johnny.karls...@assaabloy.com wrote:
Ok, that seems much better. But one more question .. You write that
there is a global variable 'errno', but isn't there one errno variable
for each socket? If so how do I access it?
You can read that by calling getsockopt() with level
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
I am glad to test it . did you push it at
git://git.savannah.nongnu.org/lwip.git ?
I git it , it seems not correct one you pushed
[and:]
I git clone from git://github.com/pabigot/lwip-contrib.git.
And found that there is makefsdata.c and
vincent cui vincent@enlogic.com wrote:
I use it, it seems have another problem.
It will make filename to lower-case. It is better to make it keep original
file name
I can't see that: file names with upper and lower case work for me.
Simon
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und
Wilson, Dave (Stellaris S/W) dave.wil...@ti.com wrote:
This is probably a topic more suited to a discussion on the TI Stellaris
support forum over on e2e.ti.com since makefsdata is a tool we provide as
part of our StellarisWare package.
I don't know the StellarisWare package too good, but
Sylvain Rochet grada...@gradator.net wrote:
lwip-port/AT32UC3A/netif/ethernetif.c::ethernetif_input() function from
the AVR32-SoftwareFramework-1.0.0-AT32AP7000 looks like:
static void ethernetif_input(void * pvParameters) {
-wait for macb and loop packet input, not important- {
if(
paoloa...@hotmail.com . paoloa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Any news about IPv6 using lwIP? I found some references on lwIP v1.4 but
seems like is not yet integrated with the rest of the TCP/IP stack. Found
some info in patch 7409 but seems like there's somewhere another version that
handles in a
Dennis Borgmann dennis.borgm...@googlemail.com wrote:
The problem I am facing is, that the compiler won't find the function
gethostbyname.
Have you defined LWIP_DNS and LWIP_SOCKET to 1 in your lwipopts.h?
Simon
___
lwip-users mailing list
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
Note that Google sends only 590-byte frames. How do I get lwip
to advertize larger MSS?
NB: I have the following TCP-related definitions in my lwipopts.h
#define TCP_MSS 1460
#define TCP_WND (40*TCP_MSS)
#define TCP_SND_BUF (8*TCP_MSS)
#define
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
1) The correct function to use is netif_set_default, right?
2) If I use static addressing, I have to declare the
default route myself, using netif_set_default?
3) When using DHCP, does the DHCP code take care of
declaring the default route, or do I have to
twenty f...@kns.com wrote:
I implemented lwip in ADI BF527 DSP on a customized board. The Ethernet
communication is fine between the board and the PC. However, if i connect
the board and pc via a linksys switch, there is no communication at all. I
am sure there is no physical connection
Åke Forslund ake.forsl...@nibe.se wrote:
Hi again, this is not the original code but a implementation of the
problem in our simple telnet-server for debug. Code below. In our original
code
we use ioctlsocket() to set non-blocking but using lwip_ fcntl() makes no
difference.
The code you
Åke Forslund ake.forsl...@nibe.se wrote:
We added some debug-prints in the case NETCONN_EVT_RCVPLUS
in event_callback() showing that rcvevent was only incremented when the
socket was set as blocking.
I'm having trouble seeing where to probe for the error so if anyone has an
idea of where
Peter Pavlov peter_pav...@mail.ru wrote:
Wireshark log:
Please provide wireshark logs as pcap file, not as text dumps. Also, please
describe what you think is wrong in a capture (referencing packets by their
number in the pcap log). Additionally, please always provide information on
what you
Peter Pavlov peter_pav...@mail.ru wrote:
I recorded communication between Firefox and controller with embedded http
server (based on lwip).
Is that the httpserver_raw from contrib?
Controller IP 192.168.0.32
PCIP 192.168.0.31
Log 1.pcap shows part of communication when picture
M.GANESH KUMAR ganeshm...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a requirement to add route in an interface. I cant find any
functions to add route.Is it possible to add/remove ip route in LWIP?
By default, lwIP does not support advanced routing. It only supports routing
packets to the appropriate subnet or
Fisher, John jfis...@comgroup.net.au wrote:
My employer wants me to make a serious attempt to determine how long it
would take to port lwIP to a DSP with a minimum addressable unit of
16-bits. I have been given time to see how much of the job I can get
done. I know from the mail archive that
Segge s...@access-way.com wrote:
I have an alert message during run-time:
Assertion p-ref == 1 failed at line 755 in
D:/lwIP/Library/src/core/ipv4/ip.c
Assertion p-ref == 1 failed at line 599 in
D:/lwIP/Library/src/core/ipv4/ip.c
The messages are always in pair.
Does that mean your target
trex7 reynaldo.k...@istgroup.de wrote:
I tried different cases when the buffer is full and I cannot process the
incomming pbufs
1. I just ignore them, no pbuf_free(). AND of course no tcp_recved().
... and you return ERR_OK? In that case, the server won't resend the packets an
you'll lose
trex7 reynaldo.k...@istgroup.de wrote:
I think that you should buffer the pbufs, and NOT call tcp_recved()
until you consume a pbuf in your audio task.
Nice Idea but thats one of the purpose of the buffer, to buffer the stream
so we can call tcp_recved as soon as possible so lwip can
trex7 reynaldo.k...@istgroup.de wrote:
-I dont realy understand what you mean. I think, the scenario that I
cannot
process the incomming pbufs will always be there and I hope that lwip has
a
mechanism to handle this scenario without losing any data.
Please correct me if I misunderstood
trex7 reynaldo.k...@istgroup.de wrote:
I guess we have a communication problem here. Your proposal is exactly
what
I'm doing.
Indeed we seem to have a communication problem. From what you have written in
your last mail, my proposal is different than what you're doing:
- You are always
Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com wrote:
It seems from reading this discussion that perhaps tcp_recved is badly
named. It's not that it's been received but that it's been processed. I
would think tcp_processed (or similar) would convey a better meaning as to
what this function is
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
Is it possible to configure lwip in such a way that the static
library I build exports the /real/ BSD socket API function names?
I.e. export foo instead of lwip_foo (for socket, connect, bind, etc)
I don't think it's currently possible without modifying the
Mason mpeg.b...@free.fr wrote:
However, this was a red herring, and I'm still stuck building
libcurl. I think the main problem is that the lwip header
naming might not be 100% POSIX compliant, and libcurl can't
find a lot of network related declarations.
I think I saw some discussion or bug
Chris Ponder chris-pon...@tritech.co.uk wrote:
I have been wondering if
there is a way of using the pbuf interface and encapsulating the whole lwIP
plus send code in a single thread, but so far this has proved an elusive
target.
You can let the code that creates pbufs (and sends them) run in
Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
Oh, and while looking at the lwIP sources, I saw you'd better call
netconn_sendto() instead of netconn_connect() and netconn_send(), as it is
implemented with only 1 call into the core instead of 2.
Plus I jstu noticed that netconn_connect() doesn't
Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
Oh, and while looking at the lwIP sources, I saw you'd better call
netconn_sendto() instead of netconn_connect() and netconn_send(), as it
is
implemented with only 1 call into the core instead of 2.
Plus
Chris Ponder chris-pon...@tritech.co.uk wrote:
Any chance you could send those files to me directly, my company's web
policy is stopping me downloading the tar.gz file from the git repo and
TortoiseGIT, so I can't actually get them :( I assume that they are ok to use
with 1.4.0?
Sending the
Chris Ponder chris-pon...@tritech.co.uk wrote:
Using tcpip_callback only gave 65.4 Mbps :(
...
/* Infinite loop */
I'm not sure using an infinite loop is the best example: don't you call
tcpip_callback too often? Also, you don't check the return value...
I'd rather let your ISR check
David Empson da...@abbey.co.nz wrote:
I think I've already mentioned this, but there should be a prominent link
to
the Wiki from the Savannah LWIP page,
Yup. I'm not really happy with the current starting page, I don't think we need
the license in full text there. I'm not sure how to change
Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
Excellent answer. May I copy it to the (yet empty) FAQ section on the
wiki?
Sorry David, I just saw it isn't empty, seems like you already wrote somthing
there :-) I just didn't notice the single section that is there...
Simon
--
NEU: FreePhone 3
Chris Ponder chris-pon...@tritech.co.uk wrote:
I then switched to the FreeRTOS version of the echo client which contains TCP
and UDP tasks. I disabled the TCP task and the pretty flashing LED task and
replaced the echo code with the same code I used in the standalone version
but using
Chris Ponder chris-pon...@tritech.co.uk wrote:
I have tried adding TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING to the project pre-processor defines
but it has made no difference L, I guess it is all the task switching, it
just seems such a performance hit.
I'm not really sure about the spelling of that macro,
Darius Babrauskas dar...@tipas.lt wrote:
I have old project with LWIP v.1.2. for AVR32.
lwIP 1.2.0 is very old and *is known* to have threading problems. Please
upgrade to the latest version.
Simon
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,-
I am trying to get destination MAC address, when I know destination IP
address for my packet offload mechanism.
I'm not sure that the etharp module exposes the correct functions to do what
you want. The information should however be available in the arp cache. Using
etharp_query() sounds
Christoph Bayer chrba...@web.de wrote:
It would be easier to use Linux, but the MCU plus external memory would be
much more expensive in comparison to a small single MCU with internal
RAM/Flash.
That's true of course.
It should act a a router, between two network interface. So I need
to
Christoph Bayer chrba...@web.de wrote:
I am now looking for a simple DHCP server build in top of it.
There is the project lwDHCP on savannah which seems to try to do this, but I
don't know what the status is. It doesn't seem like there is any code
available. Other than that, I don't know about
401 - 500 of 940 matches
Mail list logo
