From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3154 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2009 10:08:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 3140 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Oct 2009 10:08:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-fx0-f223.google.com (HELO mail-fx0-f223.google.com) (209.85.220.223) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:08:13 +0000 Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so13865799fxm.30 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.3.22 with SMTP id 22mr6032365bkl.181.1256638090766; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:08:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([86.57.137.251]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm194597bwz.2.2009.10.27.03.08.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:08:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:08:00 -0000 From: Sergei Gavrikov To: Ilija Kocho Cc: ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: Ethernet over SPI driver for ENC424J600 Message-ID: <20091027100555.GA29925@sg-ubuntu.local> References: <4AE546ED.3000303@siva.com.mk> <4AE56642.20201@dallaway.org.uk> <4AE58C05.9000305@ecoscentric.com> <20091026212810.GA12538@sg-laptop> <4AE61FE7.3050404@dallaway.org.uk> <4AE6A7FD.4000903@siva.com.mk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AE6A7FD.4000903@siva.com.mk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 Ilija Kocho wrote: > John Dallaway wrote: > >Sergei Gavrikov wrote: > >>Hello guys, may be I miss something but I thought that any > >>Ethernet eCos driver is enough abstract thing to manage ETH L2 and > >>that does not depend (well, depends a bit) on any next layer, > >>e.g., a TCP/IP implementation (RedBoot TCP/IP, *BSD, lwIP* stacks) > >>even if the driver uses another channel (SPI) to get a memory > >>access to MAC buffers. I talk about generic io/eth/* stuff > >>and..., well some kind of a future devs/eth/mc/spi/* eth_drv_.* > >>routines, for example. > > > >In theory, of course, you are correct. The network abstractions > >should ensure compatibility between any ethernet device driver and > >any TCP/IP stack. But in practice, testing can reveal all manner of > >issues which no-one was expecting. Hello Guys, Agreed. I just thought about those `eth_hwr_funs' for new ENC chip: http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-latest/ref/io-eth-drv-generic1.html and then for start a test-path would be one from io/eth `-- src |-- lwip |-- net |-- **newlwip** `-- stand_alone Of course, that will be a choice of hardware keepers. But, looking on the picture I see why Alex suggested to go by a way without asterisks, because, "...testing can reveal all manner of issues which no-one was expecting" :-) > This is our first eCos driver of this kind and we take the > abstraction and stack independence for granted. It may save us some > effort and help bring the driver sooner if somebody more experienced > points out potential potholes. Ilija, which hardware (board) do you plan to use in a development? Is that STM3210E-EVAL? Certainly, if target has not a lot of RAM, then choices can be `lwip' derivatives then. On the other hand, two new fresh projects (yours enc_eth and Simon's lwip-1.3.1) would help each other in a self testing. Keep up the good work. Regards, Sergei