[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] The new raw API - lwip_tcp_event versus (tcp_re
From: |
Chris Borrelli |
Subject: |
[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] The new raw API - lwip_tcp_event versus (tcp_recv, tcp_accept) |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Jan 2003 23:26:01 -0000 |
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 message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]
[This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]