Hi Tom,

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 08:47, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 08:15:25AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 06:10, Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 13:03, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tom,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 at 16:32, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 05:31:30PM +0300, Mikhail Kshevetskiy wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Legacy TCP stack is bad. Here are some of the known issues:
> > > > > >  * tcp packet from other connection can break a current one
> > > > > >  * tcp send sequence always starts from zero
> > > > > >  * bad tcp options processing
> > > > > >  * strange assumptions on packet size for selective acknowledge
> > > > > >  * tcp interface assumes one of the two scenarios:
> > > > > >      - data downloading from remote host to a board
> > > > > >      - request-response exchange with a small packets
> > > > > >    so it's not possible to upload large amount of data from the
> > > > > >    board to remote host.
> > > > > >  * wget test generate bad tcp stream, test should fail but it 
> > > > > > passes instead
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This series of patches fixes all of the above issues.
> > > > >
> > > > > I know Peter asked on the last one, but I want to ask as well. With 
> > > > > lwIP
> > > > > merged, why do we want to add features to the old stack? I can see
> > > > > fixing issues, but not adding new functionality as well. Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Let's apply this. It has tests and the old stack is still used by a
> > > > lot of boards. At present lwip is only used on one. There is more work
> > > > to do on the new stack, including finishing off the sandbox
> > > > implementation.
> > >
> > > I agree with applying the fixes pieces, I do not agree with apply the
> > > HTTP server pieces. This series should actually be split into 3
> >
> > But what is your objection?
> >
> > I would much rather just apply it ASAP. It has already gone through 12
> > versions, during which lwip has been prepared and applied.
>
> Yes, and to be blunt, the first bit of feedback I provided was "can you
> please look at the lwIP series instead?".
>
> > The HTTP server is a useful feature and we should be able to use it to
> > test networking in U-Boot in a more self-contained and performant
> > manner.
>
> I very much do not want to add more features to the legacy TCP stack.
> We're likely, long term, to still need some cut-back version of the old
> stack for the limited SPL cases.

This series has been in progress for a long time and it seems unfair
to just drop it, with one one board on the new stack.

Regards,
Simon

Reply via email to