[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack
From: |
Pomeroy, Marty |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:49:30 -0400 |
>> BUT never can t1 and t2 both
access s1 or s2.
Practically speaking, a socket is a
stream of data, and it doesn't make sense for tasks to contend for that
stream. You would need to provide additional coordination mechanisms at
the application level to make sure t1 is not getting t2's data from s1, and vice
versa. If you are providing that coordination mechanism at the application
level to prevent data contention, then there will be no problem in the stack
anyway.
The
only situation I can think of where this might be "useful" would be a socket
that the application never receives from and only sends to. So it might be
"nice" to send on one socket from multiple threads. But you can provide a
simple coordination mechanism to keep the requests single threaded. Or
just open two sockets.
Can
someone provide a common situation which requires one socket used on multiple
threads? If not, given the effort that would be needed, the lack
of requirement, and the simplicity of working with lwIP as it
is...
Marty
- [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, zakaria jouilil, 2014/03/18
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Alain Mouette, 2014/03/18
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Fabian Koch, 2014/03/18
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, address@hidden, 2014/03/18
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack,
Pomeroy, Marty <=
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Alain Mouette, 2014/03/19
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Simon Goldschmidt, 2014/03/19
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Martin Velek, 2014/03/24
- Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack, Simon Goldschmidt, 2014/03/24