Re: [lwip-users] Bug in pbuf.c regarding PBUF_POOL

[Andrew Lentvorski]

Mumtaz Ahmad wrote:
> Well probably i quoted it wrong . Infact I have implemented BSD style API
> that are much simpler than lwip BSD layer but they do require a
> multithreading environment for sure. These API use simple thread safe
> mechanism instead of lwip message boxes. The system is yet in testing .

Bummer.

It would be nice to have a single threaded-BSD API or a 
protothreads-based lwIP.

I waffle between using lwIP because the system I have could certainly 
make use of the extra power or using uIP because it is has a 
protothreads-based API which is claimed to be similar to the BSD API.

Yeah, the uIP performance would be less than the lwIP performance, but 
the uIP overhead would be smaller.

-a