Thanks Christiaan, I need to clarify that Im using Xilinx Micro Kernel and using the MAC in Interrupt Mode so the acutaly contrib file Im after is Xemacif_intr_xmk.c. (I believe this is copied and renamed as xemacif.c during the libgen process).
My device implements a web site very similar to that of a residential gateway device, however the device does not rely on the network connection for any serious amounts of data transfer. In your opinion, would I be better looking at using the RAW_API? Many Thanks Lachlan. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christiaan Simons Sent: Wednesday, 26 April 2006 8:17 PM To: Mailing list for lwIP users Subject: Re: [lwip-users] LWIP -> Microblaze Lachlan wrote: > Q: Can anyone point me to an updated version of xemacif.c that would > correct these problems. ? The authorative source is the contrib/ports/v2pro/netif/xemacif.c. If that file is broken, we want to fix it there. I can have a quick peek, but I can't guarantee it gets fixed. (I don't have the Xilinx development environment) > Q: Has anyone experienced similar latency problems in the read(...)function.? I know the sequential / socket API performs slow and has some unclear bugs and design flaws. See also http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=15926 What I can tell fore sure this code is slow because there are too many thread synchronisation waitstates. When using the lower level raw-API, the achievable performance levels are much better. Some users have implemented and alternative socket layer on top of the raw-API. Christiaan Simons Hardware Designer Axon Digital Design http://www.axon.tv _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
