Re: [lwip-users] LWIP - netconn with cooperative scheduling

[Kieran Mansley]

On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 10:05 -0400, Mark Phillips wrote:
> I assumed that this would be a safe environment; i.e. that none of the 
> netconn functions would suspend (waiting for mbox or sem) when it was 
> unsafe for a different task to call one of these functions, but I 
> suspect I may be wrong here?

The golden rule for lwIP and threads is that there should only be one
thread in the core stack at any one time.  Having multiple sockets
serviced from different threads is not guaranteed to work, even in a
cooperatively-scheduled OS.

Kieran