[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] The new raw API - lwip_tcp_event versus (tcp_recv, tcp_accept)

[David Ryan]

Does anyone know if the api api (socket interface) use the old 
CALLBACK_API or EVENT_API?

I've only just moved onto CVS version and wondering if there is anything 
additional need to be defined for the core to use the socket interface?

Thanks,
David.

Chris Borrelli wrote:

> I figured it out...  In case someone else is having the same issue:
>
> In the new lwipopts.h there is an option to switch between the old 
> callback API and the new event API.  I just happened to stumble upon 
> this when looking through the source.
>
> You can either define LWIP_CALLBACK_API or LWIP_EVENT_API.  The 
> default is to define LWIP_EVENT_API.
>
> -Chris
>
> Chris Borrelli wrote:
>
>> I have recently updated from 0.5.3 to the current source... I have 
>> managed to compile the lwip library  thanks to some recent posts 
>> about bugs in the current release... and now I am working on porting 
>> the application.
>>
>> Can someone explain the new event based design of the raw API?  My 
>> example applications are an echo server and an echo client.  At 
>> startup, the user selects which app to run (client or server).  Based 
>> on which application the user selects, I register a different 
>> callback function using tcp_recv - the application acts differently 
>> depending on whether its the originator of the data versus the server 
>> echoing the data...
>>
>> It seems as though this functionality has been removed, and has been 
>> replaced by this event callback stuff... which means the callback 
>> from the lwip stack is not tied to the pcb anymore.  Seems like I 
>> will have to keep a data structure of pcbs and function pointers, so 
>> that I can get back the functionality that has been taken out of 
>> lwip... ??
>>
>> I looked at the api and the unix test app, but these don't have the 
>> lwip_tcp_event function, so I guess they have not been updated beyond 
>> 0.5.3.  The minimal example assumes only one application.
>>
>> Can anyone offer any wisdom?
>>
>>  Thanks,
>> -Chris
>>





_____________________________________________________________________

This Email, together with attachments, is for exclusive and confidential
use of the addressee(s).  Distribution, use or reproduction without prior
written consent is prohibited.  WebSecure does not guarantee this message
free of errors, interference or viruses.  This Information is CONFIDENTIAL.
_______________________________________________________________________
[This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]