Leon Woestenberg wrote: >> Thanks for the detailed post - good to see folks getting to grips with >> the stack. The above seemed to summarise quite nicely and I agree >> completely with that. >> > I completely agree with you; It's good to see there is interest in the > lwIP stack from developers that are concerned abouts its correctness. > > The SYS_LIGHTWEIGHT_PROT protection was introduced by one of the > developers using the stack to protect *ONLY* between interrupt context > and single-thread user-space context if I am not mistaken.
I think you are mistaken. > I am all for removing it, because the locking solution does not scale > across different platforms. I have to use SYS_LIGHTWEIGHT_PROT in a _multithreaded_ environment with interrupt-triggered device driver. Removing it would render lwIP unusable for me. I guess it lies in the nature of a simple locking mechanism to be platform specific, but that makes it "lightweight". I vote against a removal. All the best Peter _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
