Re: [lwip-devel] (no subject)

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello Luke,

address@hidden wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Leon Woestenberg wrote:
>
> > I would suggest using standard C names, with lwip_ prefix, such
> > as malloc() lwip_free(). The memory allocator should then implement
> > those functions.
>
> Sounds like a great idea to me. Perhaps the memory allocator could be a
> part of the port instead of the main lwIP tree? This would make a lot of
> sense to me. The only problem is how to support both a general purpose and
> pool allocator for those that really want it (anyone?).

That should be no problem at all; a pool allocator simply returns
any memory pool block that is at least the requested size, and does
it own black-box bookkeeping.

> I think the premise with which you started your message is a good one - we
> should aim for maximum flexibility so that people who need to can
> customise for their application.
OK, glad we agree. This indeed allows people to use their own memory 
allocator. I know this makes sense for people using eCos or uCOS-II,
and other (RT)OS's.

So work should start decoupling the lwIP memory allocator, and cleaning
up the API.

Regards,

Leon.