[lwip-users] Is tcp_err()-callback optional?

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

indepenedent from the fact if it makes sense or if it is bad program style:
is it mandatory to announce a error-callback via tcp_err() or will the
whole thing also work smoothly when there is no error-callback function
available?

Thanks!
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Is tcp_err()-callback optional?

[Karl Karpfen]

OK, thanks!

2015-10-12 13:17 GMT+02:00 Simon Goldschmidt <goldsi...@gmx.de>:

> Karl Karpfen wrote:
> >indepenedent from the fact if it makes sense or if it is bad program
> style:
> > is it mandatory to announce a error-callback via tcp_err() or will the
> whole
> > thing also work smoothly when there is no error-callback function
> available?
>
> It is kind ofmandatory: without an 'err' callback, your application would
> never know if the pcb got deallocated (and possibly reused) due to a RST
> received or due to local pcb shortage.
>
>
> Simon
>
> ___
> lwip-users mailing list
> lwip-users@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Call tcp_close() out of tcp_recv()-context?

[Karl Karpfen]

2015-09-07 14:17 GMT+02:00 Sergio R. Caprile :

> It depends on what you mean by "context".
>
>
The structure is as follows (all non-OS and with RAW API):

With tcp_recv() I set up a receive-callback function my_recv(). my_recv()
is triggered by lwIP whenever some data are received. Some of these data
may contain an information "connection will be closed by host".

My question: can I do a tcp_close() from within my_recv() which is called
in lwIP's receive-context (which possibly may be a receive-IRQ)?

Thanks!
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] Call tcp_close() out of tcp_recv()-context?

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

I'm using raw-API within my application and have defined a receive-callback
by using tcp_recv(). Now it may happen a close-command (from my own
protocol running on top of TCP/IP) is received within this receive-callback.

My question: is it allowed to call tcp_close() out of the context of this
receive-function?

Thanks!

Karl
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Patch to update from 1.4.0 to 1.4.x?

[Karl Karpfen]

OK, I checked some of the differences between TI's lwIP 1.4.0 and the
original version. I don't really understand what's going on:

- in err.c the error ERR_WOULDBLOCK does not exit

- in ipv4/ip.c there is a statement in ip_input() which seems to cause
opposite behaviour:
if (check_ip_src  current_iphdr_src.addr == IPADDR_ANY)
vs.
if (check_ip_src  !ip_addr_isany(current_iphdr_src))

- in core/mem.c the static sys_mutex_t mem_mutex; is encapsulated by an
#if !NO_SYS/#endif which does not exist in original version

Is it possible TI's lwIP bases on some release candidate or BETA-version?

Thanks!


2015-03-18 12:58 GMT+01:00 Robert Deschambault 
robert.deschamba...@gmail.com:

 Given the number of fixes and improvements I would recommend going through
 the pain and try to keep any custom code out of the stock sources. I moved
 our v1.3.2 code to the latest from the main branch in git.
 On Mar 18, 2015 3:57 AM, Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:


 Karl Karpfen wrote:

 So my question: is there a patch available somewhere that can be applied
 to an existing 1.4.0 which adds all changes and - probably - shows me some
 conflicts at these positions where my lwIP variant was changed comparing to
 1.4.0? http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases/lwip/ does not contain
 something like that...

 Comparing and merging manually seems to be impossible, nearly all files
 are changed, so this would be a long time task.


 No, there is no patch. You could either create the patch on your own by
 diffing the two versions, or you could compare your vendors version an the
 original to see if they have changed something.

 Simon

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users


 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] Patch to update from 1.4.0 to 1.4.x?

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

I'm running my controller with lwIP 1.4.0 and tried recently to update it
to 1.4.1 but with no success. Simply copying the 1.4.1 sources lead to a
non-working network stack. So I have to assume the vendor of the board
support package has changed some important things directly within lwIP.

So my question: is there a patch available somewhere that can be applied to
an existing 1.4.0 which adds all changes and - probably - shows me some
conflicts at these positions where my lwIP variant was changed comparing to
1.4.0? http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases/lwip/ does not contain
something like that...

Comparing and merging manually seems to be impossible, nearly all files are
changed, so this would be a long time task.

Thanks!
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi Sylvain,

now that it is working it is not really a problem for me. But that's what I
have seen:

in lwiplib.c / lwIPInit() there is a statement

if(lwipIf-ipMode == IPADDR_USE_STATIC)
{
ip_addr.addr = htonl(lwipIf-ipAddr);
net_mask.addr = htonl(lwipIf-netMask);
gw_addr.addr = htonl(lwipIf-gwAddr);
}

which seems to be responsible for exchanging the byteorder.

udp_sendto() of the SNTP-code does not seem to do something similar. So
that could explain why both behave that different.

Karl



2015-02-06 15:08 GMT+01:00 Sylvain Rochet grada...@gradator.net:

 Hello Karl,

 On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 08:57:06AM +0100, Karl Karpfen wrote:
  2015-02-03 15:24 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:
 
   Karl Karpfen wrote:
  
   There's nothing strange here: the contents of ip_addr_t needs to be in
   network byte order and the sntp client calls a function that returns
 the
   correct byte order.
 
  OK, to clarify that: to get the ip_addr_t that is used to configure my
  network interface I have to do the following for IP, gateway and netmask:
 
  ipaddr_aton(c, globalConfig.ip);
  globalConfig.ip.addr=htonl(globalConfig.ip.addr);

 Something is wrong in your setup/port/whatever, what I have is:

 ipaddr_aton((char*)linebuf, config.ethernet.address4);
 ipaddr_aton((char*)linebuf, config.ethernet.netmask4);
 ipaddr_aton((char*)linebuf, config.ethernet.gateway4);
 netif_add(MACB_if, config.ethernet.address4, config.ethernet.netmask4,
 config.ethernet.gateway4, NULL, ethernetif_init, tcpip_input);

 Could you dig deeper into your issue finding the root cause of the
 problem ?

 Sylvain

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

2015-02-03 15:24 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:

 There's nothing strange here: the contents of ip_addr_t needs to be in
 network byte order and the sntp client calls a function that returns the
 correct byte order.



OK, to clarify that: to get the ip_addr_t that is used to configure my
network interface I have to do the following for IP, gateway and netmask:

ipaddr_aton(c, globalConfig.ip);
globalConfig.ip.addr=htonl(globalConfig.ip.addr);

For getting the ip_addr_t for the SNTP-server this is not neccesary, there
a plain

ipaddr_aton(c, globalConfig.sntp_ip);

works (without the need to do a htonl() on the addr member).

So this is different depending on the usage of the IP - for what reason
ever.
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi Sylvain,

that is not a solution since I have to parse a string containing the IP.

Meanwhile it is working. The trick: I have to do a htonl/s() for all
addresses that are used to configure the network interface (IP, netmask,
gateway) but not for the IP and port number of the SNTP server to be
contacted.

Somewhat strange but works this way.

Karl


2015-01-29 18:04 GMT+01:00 Sylvain Rochet grada...@gradator.net:

 Hi Karl,

 On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 05:57:50PM +0100, Karl Karpfen wrote:
  2015-01-29 15:56 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:
 
   Karl Karpfen wrote:
No but there I have to specify the IP of the NTP-server to communcate
   with
My assumption: when I have to ntohl() the netif-IP, I have to do
 that for
the NTP-IP and the port-number too. Is this wrong?
  
   Yes.
  
   Do you have evidence that there is an endianness problem here? Have you
   checked with wireshark what gets sent?
  
   BTW: ipaddr_aton already returns network byte order and udp_sendto()
 takes
   a host byte order port. Please first check your code before assuming
 bugs
   in other people's code ;-)
  
 
  Sorry but I did nowhere and never blamed somebody for bugs, I just asked
 a
  question regarding USAGE of lwIP - or isn't this allowed here in this
  maling list?

 I didn't read thoroughly, what about IP4_ADDR(*, a, b, c, d) ?

 Sylvain

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

2015-01-29 15:56 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  No but there I have to specify the IP of the NTP-server to communcate
 with
  My assumption: when I have to ntohl() the netif-IP, I have to do that for
  the NTP-IP and the port-number too. Is this wrong?

 Yes.

 Do you have evidence that there is an endianness problem here? Have you
 checked with wireshark what gets sent?

 BTW: ipaddr_aton already returns network byte order and udp_sendto() takes
 a host byte order port. Please first check your code before assuming bugs
 in other people's code ;-)


Sorry but I did nowhere and never blamed somebody for bugs, I just asked a
question regarding USAGE of lwIP - or isn't this allowed here in this
maling list?
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

2015-01-29 7:46 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  - I have rewritten the example a bit to get rid of the sys_xxx()
 functions which are not available for me

 I'm not sure I understand. You don't have sys_timeout/sys_untimeout?


That's correct, LWIP_TIMERS is not configured in my system because NO_SYS
is 1 and NO_SYS_NO_TIMERS is 1 too. But this is not a problems since I can
handle this out of my application.



  - I do a ntohl() on all IP's that are retruned by ipaddr_aton(), this
 seems to be necessary on my platform
  (at least for configuring the IP of my Ethernet interface it has to be
 done to apply the correct address
  for it, so I assume this is necessary for all IPs)
 
  - based on this I do a ntohs() for the SNTP-port too

 Both shouldn't be necessary.


At least for the IP it definitely is necessary. When I hand over a
non-ntohl()'ed IP-address to LWIP_IF.ipAddr (used with lwIPInit()), my
network interface comes up with wrong IP.
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] SNTP client does not work

[Karl Karpfen]

2015-01-29 14:35 GMT+01:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  At least for the IP it definitely is necessary. When I hand over a
  non-ntohl()'ed IP-address to LWIP_IF.ipAddr (used with lwIPInit()),
  my network interface comes up with wrong IP.


 Of course it's necessary for ip addresses to be in network byte order.
 However, you were talking about sntp.c. There's no netif setup in there.


No but there I have to specify the IP of the NTP-server to communcate with.
My assumption: when I have to ntohl() the netif-IP, I have to do that for
the NTP-IP and the port-number too. Is this wrong?
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Handling in case of disabled Nagle

[Karl Karpfen]

2014-12-08 19:47 GMT+01:00 goldsi...@gmx.de goldsi...@gmx.de:

 As it's always better to know than to guess, why don't you check wih
 wireshark?


Simply because Wireshark does not work - it crashes on capturing. This is
for sure a Windows-problem but it keeps me away from analysing this.

But connection problems I described does not seem to have the same reason
like this crash, I could do a (very quick) test on a different Windows PC,
there I could observe the same.
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] Handling in case of disabled Nagle

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

I found a strange problem related to Nagle-algorithm but possibly caused by
host operating system. My application is as follows:

- host sends payload data to my lwIP-driven device in packets of 1460 bytes
- host sends state-requests to this device in packets of 3 bytes
- device sends state-response in packets of 40 bytes to host (which is
waiting for them asynchronously, means receiving is done in an own thread)

Since all these packets have to be handled as fast as possible, I disabled
Nagle on both ends (TCP_NODELAY on host side and tcp_nagle_disable() on
device side).

Now there is a situation where host sends state-requests (3 bytes) to
device quite fast. Under Linux host is able to receive the related
state-response (40 bytes) wihtout problems, unter Windows at some point no
more data are received, it seems disabled Nagle-algorithm seems to stall
the receiving-side when many packets are sent. From device-side it seems it
is not possible to send these data (means even to queue them). Since it
works smoothly with Linux I think that happens because Windows no longer
accepts any packets so that the lwIP-internal buffer becomes full at some
point.

My current - really ugly - solution is to have a delay of at least 10 msec
after submission of every send-request. This lets Windows receive the
response without problems.

My question: did anybody notice such a behaviour? Is there anything I can
do to avoid this and to enforce lwIP to send the response also when there
are many packages received?

Thanks!
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] poll-function not called

[Karl Karpfen]

Just to complete this discussion: TI's support for their products is really
very, very poor. There is simply no answer to my question why they have
disabled it although the poll-callbacks are still there (not the first time
that there is no response to users requests also in case of definitive
bugs). So I'll try to do some hacks for my own according to your hints.
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] poll-function not called

[Karl Karpfen]

OK, thanks, this leaded me into the correct direction: Texas Instrumetns
has implemented full poll-functionality but they have set both NO_SYS and
NO_SYS_NO_TIMERS to 1 which disables the timers completely. One of both
seems to be wrong/superfluid for me...


2014-09-22 9:31 GMT+02:00 mobin.seven mobin.se...@live.com:

 Hi lad
 tcp_tmr() must be called every TCP_TMR_INTERVAL milliseconds.this is
 necessary for poll callback.



 --
 View this message in context:
 http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/poll-function-not-called-tp23324p23326.html
 Sent from the lwip-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Context of poll and recv?

[Karl Karpfen]

Sergio,

reception is not the problem but transmission. Here I learned I can't
enqueue data fgrom main loop directly. Meanwhile I'm setting a similar flag
and collect all my data from within transmission IRQ context - which works
fine.

Karl


2014-09-17 15:03 GMT+02:00 Sergio R. Caprile scapr...@gmail.com:

 Hi Karl,
 I'm not trying to teach you how to do things, but I need to ask you if
 there is any reason why you can't rise a flag in your eth rx interrupt
 and run all lwIP code from the main loop ? (zero latency ?)

 Mine (sort of):

 void eth_input(ifc)
 {
 do {
 if(!flag)
 break;
 p = pbuf_alloc();
 get frame;
 netif-input(p, ifc);
 } while(more frames);
 }

 main()
 {
 while(1){
 eth_input(myeth);

 }
 }

 void rxint()
 {
 ack;
 set flag;
 }



 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] poll-function not called

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

I'm using lwIP 1.4.0 implementation that comes with Starterware for AM3358
from Texas Instruments. Thus I do not know that much about its exact
implementation for used hardware. Now I found the poll-function is never
called in TI's implementation.

To track down the problem: where in lwIP is this this part implemented? Any
hints/suggestion hwere to look at are welcome!

Kind regards

Karl
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?

[Karl Karpfen]

2014-09-17 9:08 GMT+02:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

  Currently I'm doing it as described at
 http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCPin section
  Sending TCP data which seems to be wrong for my case...

 I only get an empty page with this link: This page needs content. You can
 help by adding a sentence or a photo.


Sorry, it is http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCP
http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCPin , I forgot the space between the
link and the following word in.
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] Context of poll and recv?

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

this is a follow-up to How to check send state? but I start a new
discussion since it is a new question:

I'm trying to enqueue some data into lwIP's send queue that are generated
from within my applications main-loop (which is not allowed). Now my
solution is to just set a flag and then fetch and enqueue the data out of
 lwIPs thread context. This is done once periodically within my
poll-function (specified by tcp_poll()) and once immediately from within my
recv-function (specified with tcp_recv()).

My question: are both running in same IRQ-context or are they triggered by
different ones so that filling the send buffer this way would lead to
troubles too? A check if previously enqueued data are fully send of course
is implemented.

Thanks for all your kind help :-)
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?

[Karl Karpfen]

OK, got it - thanks :-)

2014-09-17 11:10 GMT+02:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  Currently I'm doing it as described at
 http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCPin section
  Sending TCP data which seems to be wrong for my case...


 There's nothing wrong with what's described at
 http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCP.
 What's wrong is that your lwIP calls into lwIP from interrupt context and
 you call it from your main loop. This is not allowed, that's all.


 Simon

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] Context of poll and recv?

[Karl Karpfen]

Great, thanks! :-) :-) :-)


2014-09-17 12:16 GMT+02:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  [..]
  My question: are both running in same IRQ-context or are they triggered
  by different ones so that filling the send buffer this way would lead to
  troubles too? A check if previously enqueued data are fully send of
 course is implemented.

 That *totally* depends on your lwIP port. However, that port has to ensure
 lwIP code is not executed in parallel, so you should be safe (unless your
 port does not follow this rule).


 Simon

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?

[Karl Karpfen]

I don't use any threads but plain, bare-metal programming. Here lwIP is
running in context of the Ethernet-PHY-interrupt(s) while some data are
pushed to lwIP from the main-loop.

2014-09-16 9:04 GMT+02:00 Simon Goldschmidt goldsi...@gmx.de:

 Karl Karpfen wrote:
  [..]
  My problem here: sentLength is manipulated out of interrupt context
 while checking
  it for completion is done out of main loop.

 That's a problem indeed. Seems like you are violating lwIP's threading
 requirements (search the list or the wiki, there are numerous post about
 it).


 Simon

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?

[Karl Karpfen]

OK, so let me ask this in an different way:

Currently I do have data to be sent available in main loop only. How can I
enqueue these data into the lwIP-ISR-context correctly so that it can be
transmitted without problems?

Currently I'm doing it as described at http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Raw/TCPin
section Sending TCP data which seems to be wrong for my case...


2014-09-16 17:20 GMT+02:00 Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com:

 Yeah, I should have kept reading.  Sorry



 *From:* lwip-users-bounces+bauerbach=arrayonline@nongnu.org [mailto:
 lwip-users-bounces+bauerbach=arrayonline@nongnu.org] *On Behalf Of *Simon
 Goldschmidt
 *Sent:* Tuesday, September 16, 2014 9:51 AM
 *To:* Mailing list for lwIP users
 *Subject:* Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?



 Bill, I appreciate you trying to teach programming basics, but I think
 this won't get Karl Karpfen further: sending from main-loop and receiving
 in interrupt just won't work with lwIP.



 Simon



 *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 16. September 2014 um 15:43 Uhr
 *Von:* Bill Auerbach bauerb...@arrayonline.com
 *An:* 'Mailing list for lwIP users' lwip-users@nongnu.org
 *Betreff:* Re: [lwip-users] How to check send state?

 Hi,



 Did you declare sentLength as volatile?  You might also need to protect it
 if it’s not loaded/stored in a single processor instruction (not likely to
 be the case with a 32-bit architecture).



 Bill



 *From:* lwip-users-bounces+bauerbach=arrayonline@nongnu.org [
 mailto:lwip-users-bounces+bauerbach=arrayonline@nongnu.org
 lwip-users-bounces+bauerbach=arrayonline@nongnu.org] *On Behalf Of *Karl
 Karpfen
 *Sent:* Monday, September 15, 2014 3:00 PM
 *To:* lwip-users@nongnu.org
 *Subject:* [lwip-users] How to check send state?



 Hi,

 within my lwIP application (TCP with permanent connection) I'm sending
 some data out of main-loop (no interrupt context) and start submission by
 calling

 tcp_output(currentPcb);

 Sending of data is done via tcp_write(). Within the send function itself
 amount of data already sent is stored in a variable sentLength. Now to find
 out if it is possible to send next bunch of data I check this variable.
 When its size is equal to the length of the previous data buffer, sending
 was completed and I start submission of next buffer.



 My problem here: sentLength is manipulated out of interrupt context while
 checking it for completion is done out of main loop. It seems this
 sometimes causes troubles, at receiver side I can see incomplete frames.

 So my question: what is the correct way to find out if currentPcb has
 finished sending (or better has pushed all data to tcp_write()) and is
 ready to accept next bunch of data?

 Thanks!

 ___ lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

 ___
 lwip-users mailing list
 lwip-users@nongnu.org
 https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

[lwip-users] How to check send state?

[Karl Karpfen]

Hi,

within my lwIP application (TCP with permanent connection) I'm sending some
data out of main-loop (no interrupt context) and start submission by calling

tcp_output(currentPcb);

Sending of data is done via tcp_write(). Within the send function itself
amount of data already sent is stored in a variable sentLength. Now to find
out if it is possible to send next bunch of data I check this variable.
When its size is equal to the length of the previous data buffer, sending
was completed and I start submission of next buffer.

My problem here: sentLength is manipulated out of interrupt context while
checking it for completion is done out of main loop. It seems this
sometimes causes troubles, at receiver side I can see incomplete frames.

So my question: what is the correct way to find out if currentPcb has
finished sending (or better has pushed all data to tcp_write()) and is
ready to accept next bunch of data?

Thanks!
___
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users