[lwip-devel] [bug #19347] netif_add & tcpip_init problem

[Frédéric Bernon]

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #19347 (project lwip):

>For the avoidance of doubt, I have been doing my netif_add's in
>the tcpip_init_done callback. 

Yes, I'm agree, but it's only possible for netifs available at boot time...

>rather than having to add extra tests and code in commonly used
>code paths, such as tcpip_ethinput/callback, etc. (as Frederic
>modified in that patch earlier in comment #2 to address this
>problem), it is better to change less frequently used code.

Ok, but I didn't think that check the mailbox consumne lot of cycles (but if
you think that, I can add a macro, or remove them if I implement new
messages).

>I have a question though - where does the tcpip thread access
>the netif list? I didn't think it did. 

Simple question, simple answer : EVERYWHERE !!! (joke). Just do a grep on
"netif_list" :
ip_input (ipv4&ipv6)
ip_route (ipv4&ipv6)
dhcp_coarse_tmr (dhcp)
dhcp_fine_tmr (dhcp)
ip_addrentry_get_value (snmp)
ip_rteentry_get_value (snmp)
snmp_ifindextonetif (snmp)
snmp_netiftoifindex (snmp)
igmp_init (igmp)

I don't think it's a good idea to "add extra tests and code in commonly used
code paths", isn't it :) ? So, add semaphores in all these processings is not
a good idea, that's why I have propose to add new messages, because the
"switch (msg->type)" won't be slower is you set these messages at the end of
the switch (with most of compilers). More, if this extra processing isn't
necessary we can easily disable it with a configuration option.

>About the times: I'm sure most developers here have real jobs

Why, you don't have a real job? ;) Integrate lwIP in our products is a part
of my job, and I suppose that lot of users have the same aim. The problem is
there is no lot of "real" active developers on lwIP (23 in the list, but only
5-6 on the forum most of time), and if we have to wait that all give a
response, sometimes, we have to wait a long, long time... Sometimes, some
threads don't have any comments. Kieran have accept to be project leader,
even if no longer use lwIP himself, and he take time to response to lot of
requests (and it's wonderfull, thank you again for that), but not all, and
it's normal. In this case, I suppose we can decide to commit without wait
more (I also suppose that's why he give us write access to CVS). There is no
"offical" rules about check in to CVS, so 24h or Kieran's agreement are rules
I will follow now.

About informations, I think that projects where team talk and know how
everyone works, help to have good results. I already have "private" emails
with some developers to understand their jobs, and how they use lwIP. So,
that's why I have given some informations about my job. But, last, it's just
a point of view...

Tomorrow, I will commit some patchs, and submit new ones. I hope you can tell
me what you think about them...


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?19347>

_______________________________________________
  Message posté via/par Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/