If you want to increase performance in a limited functionality
application, perhaps you don't need the UDP checksum?
I think most of the CPU cycles related to TCP or UDP communication are
consumed in the checksum calculation.
/Timmy
Roger Cover wrote:
Greetings Frédéric,
The performance decrease I measured was relative to version 0.6.3 of lwIP. The
measurement is the total transfer time for a 33560192 byte data set from my instrument to
an application on my PC using TCP/IP. The time was 13.98 seconds for lwIP 0.6.3 and 19.56
seconds for lwIP 1.2.0. I am using the same "driver", with minor modifications
to accommodate the API changes in the lwIP code from 0.6.3 to 1.2.0, and the same
applications on the PC and my embedded PPC405 processor. Removing the statistics improved
the performance, but did not recover the entire 40%.
I will let you know what improvements I get from the lwipopts.h changes you
suggested.
Regards,
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frédéric BERNON
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 3:03 AM
To: Mailing list for lwIP users
Subject: RE : [lwip-users] Optimizations for applications
requiringlimitedfunctionality.
Hi Roger,
I have noticed a decrease in performance (about 40%)
40% ???? Was is this measure ? Max bandwidth on output, number of cycles used,
footprint? If I understand what you wrote, it was on max bandwidth? And just
due to statistics? Seems strange...
_______________________________________________
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
