On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 07:53:09PM +0600, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> +
> +#include <common.h>
> +#include <command.h>
> +#include <console.h>
> +
> +#include <lwip/dhcp.h>
> +#include <lwip/prot/dhcp.h>
> +#include "lwip/timeouts.h"
> +
> +#include <net/eth.h>
> +#include <net/ulwip.h>
> +
> +#define DHCP_WAIT_MS 2000
Is this the time we wait for a dhcp reply? If so we should bump it to
something higher
> +
> +static void dhcp_tmo(void *arg)
> +{
> + struct netif *netif = (struct netif *)arg;
> + struct dhcp *dhcp;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + dhcp = netif_get_client_data(netif, LWIP_NETIF_CLIENT_DATA_INDEX_DHCP);
> + if (!dhcp)
> + return;
> +
> + switch (dhcp->state) {
> + case DHCP_STATE_BOUND:
> + err += env_set("bootfile", dhcp->boot_file_name);
> + err += env_set("ipaddr", ip4addr_ntoa(&dhcp->offered_ip_addr));
> + err += env_set("netmask", ip4addr_ntoa(&dhcp->offered_sn_mask));
> + err += env_set("serverip", ip4addr_ntoa(&dhcp->server_ip_addr));
> + if (err)
> + log_err("error update envs\n");
> + log_info("DHCP client bound to address %s\n",
> ip4addr_ntoa(&dhcp->offered_ip_addr));
> + break;
> + default:
> + return;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +int ulwip_dhcp(void)
> +{
> + struct netif *netif;
> + int eth_idx;
> +
> + eth_idx = eth_get_dev_index();
> + if (eth_idx < 0)
> + return -EPERM;
> +
> + netif = netif_get_by_index(eth_idx + 1);
Why is the +1 needed here?
> + if (!netif)
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + sys_timeout(DHCP_WAIT_MS, dhcp_tmo, netif);
> +
> + return dhcp_start(netif) ? 0 : -EPERM;
> +}
> --
> 2.30.2
>
