From: Simon Kallweit <simon.kallweit@intefo.ch>
To: John Dallaway <john@dallaway.org.uk>
Cc: John Eigelaar <john@kses.net>,
eCos development list <ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: lwIP
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49DA3505.5080208@intefo.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49DA31CE.6000509@dallaway.org.uk>
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, BSD socket API)
>
Well, I think we might probably work with the CVS version as the 1.3.1
release is coming along. The only problems I see is with PPP. In the
current state it's very hard to support both the sequential (threaded)
and raw (non-threaded) modes. Might be a good opportunity to clean it up
and also commit it to the lwIP project.
> 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'm not sure (initialization
etc.) if this really matters as long as it's documented well.
> d) Absolutely minimal mangling of the lwIP sources (it should be easy to
> upgrade lwIP again in the future)
>
Mangling is very minimal for these exact reasons, except the PPP sources
which were changed quite a bit.
> e) All lwIP configuration points accessible via CDL options
>
Pretty much done I think.
> f) DocBook (.sgml) documentation which describes any eCos-specific
> aspects of the stack and otherwise points to generic lwIP
> documentation
>
I agree. No documentation in my current port.
> g) Any fixes necessary in the lwIP sources contributed up to the master
> lwIP project for inclusion in the next generic release
>
I agree. Again, PPP might be the biggest part here.
> h) eCos test cases for all functionality
>
I have already ported some tests.
> Perhaps the best way forward is for John Eigelaar to take Simon
> Kallweit's package, work on the sequential API initially and post his
> revised package for review and further work by others. Simon, is the
> lwIP package in your repository ready for handoff?
>
I think we should first discuss my port a little and see if it needs to
be changed to fit the needs of others.
The sources in my git repository are what I currently use in my project.
Anybody willing to work on it may just branch my tree.
Simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-06 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-21 16:49 lwIP Frank J. Beckmann
2008-11-21 16:53 ` lwIP Simon Kallweit
2008-11-21 17:12 ` lwIP Simon Kallweit
2008-11-21 19:50 ` lwIP Frank Pagliughi
2008-11-24 15:13 ` lwIP John Eigelaar
2009-04-04 14:54 ` lwIP John Dallaway
2009-04-06 9:44 ` lwIP Simon Kallweit
2009-04-06 10:44 ` lwIP John Eigelaar
2009-04-06 16:46 ` lwIP John Dallaway
2009-04-06 16:59 ` Simon Kallweit [this message]
2009-04-07 7:55 ` lwIP John Dallaway
2009-04-07 8:17 ` lwIP Simon Kallweit
2008-11-21 19:35 ` lwIP Jonathan Larmour
2008-11-21 19:37 ` lwIP Jonathan Larmour
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49DA3505.5080208@intefo.ch \
--to=simon.kallweit@intefo.ch \
--cc=ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org \
--cc=john@dallaway.org.uk \
--cc=john@kses.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).