[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lwip-users] Compiler warnings
From: |
Goldschmidt Simon |
Subject: |
[lwip-users] Compiler warnings |
Date: |
Fri, 6 Oct 2006 13:51:48 +0200 |
Hi all,
I was just wandering if anybody has looked into ANSI-compatibility for
the last year... I found a post from 09/2004 about that (and an answer
of Kieran, who seems to be pretty active there). But has anybody ever
cared to do something about it? I get so many warnings when compiling
lwIP that I took the effort changing most of them.
Though in some cases (mainly pointer arithmetic -> alignment), a fast
fix is not possible, most warnings are cast issues which could easily be
fixed.
Anyone else but me cares about that? Hope so...
Simon.
--
Simon Goldschmidt
PA-PG-FT
Pepperl+Fuchs GmbH
Koenigsberger Allee 87
68307 MANNHEIM / GERMANY
Phone: +49 621 776-1714
Telefax: +49 621 776-1557
E-Mail:address@hidden
www.pepperl-fuchs.com
PROTECTING YOUR PROCESS
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> address@hidden
> g
> [mailto:address@hidden
> ongnu.org] On Behalf Of Kieran Mansley
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 12:17 PM
> To: Mailing list for lwIP users
> Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Bug in pbuf.c regarding PBUF_POOL
>
> On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 11:47 +0200, Goldschmidt Simon wrote:
>
> > Hope for some comments on this...
> >
>
> Sorry for the multiple replies, but I knew this had been
> discussed recently, I was just searching in the wrong mailing list:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lwip-devel/2006-03/msg00000.html
>
> (and subsequent replies).
>
> i.e. I think we concluded that none of us understand how it's
> supposed to work either.
>
> The post from Adam that I pointed at in my last reply
> suggests that it's not designed to make it thread safe - the
> core of lwIP is not thread safe and you as the porter must
> ensure that only one thread uses it at once - and so it may
> be doing what was originally intended, but that this is not
> what you want it to do.
>
> I still reckon it's not doing much that is useful though,
> especially as pbuf_pool_free_lock is never set to anything
> other than 0, and so it should be purged.
>
> Kieran
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>