[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack

From: Simon Goldschmidt
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] the sequentiality of the lwip stack
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 17:36:25 +0100

Pomeroy, Marty wrote:

 >>  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.

Close, but not exactly. A socket is *two* streams of data, TX and RX. And even if I can't tell you an example, the simple possibility to use a socket like that can produce a requirement. Plus the close-while-another-thread-is-blocking case would sometimes be rather handy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not fighting for this feature, nor will I implement it myself. But I can see why people want this. And if someone would provide a patch that is a no-op when not used (i.e. does not bloat the current code), I wouldn't hesitate to add it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]