Re: [lwip-users] Why does sys_sem_wait_timeout exist?

[Kieran Mansley]

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 11:43 +0200, Atte Kojo wrote:
> While I was investigating the sockets API I really couldn't understand 
> the reason why sys_sem_wait_timeout() has been implemented. To me it 
> seems that somebody has implemented semaphores with timeouts 
> (sys_sem_wait_timeout) on top of semaphores and timeouts (sys_sem_wait 
> and sys_timeout), which are implemented on top of semaphores with 
> timeouts (sys_arch_sem_wait).
> 
> As far as I understand sys_arch_sem_wait is guaranteed to exist, so why 
> implement redundant functionality for just one function (lwip_select).

Erk, can't remember - too long ago!  If this is causing a problem I
might be able to look into it, but my best guess is that it's a code
cleanness thing. i.e. perhaps it wasn't intended to be using the
sys_arch_* code up in the sockets layer.

Kieran