[lwip-devel] [bug #3031] Implement a new fully pool-based pbuf implementation.

[Simon Goldschmidt]

Follow-up Comment #17, bug #3031 (project lwip):

> I see no reason why we shouldn't allow chained PBUF_RAMs, so the assertions
are probably a good idea.

I still have doubts on this since I think this could affect existing
applications that are built on the assumption that PBUF_RAM pbufs are not
chained. Maybe we have to implement a new type for this? PBUF_RAM_NOCOPY
could be the right type for this.

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?3031>

_______________________________________________
  Nachricht geschickt von/durch Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/