lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Bugs: bug #21656, recvmbox problem in netconn API...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #21656: recvmbox problem in netconn API (netconn_recv and others)
Submitter: | Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> | ||
Submitted: | Tue 27 Nov 2007 09:27:58 PM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | None | Status: | Fixed |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | goldsimon |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
lwIP version: | None |
Jump to the original submission
Fri 04 Jan 2008 04:12:15 PM UTC, comment #12: |
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Fri 04 Jan 2008 03:56:41 PM UTC, comment #11: Why don't we simply use netconn_alloc() - that way we don't have to rename the function when adding or removing parameters. |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 04 Jan 2008 03:47:55 PM UTC, comment #10: But can we replace netconn_alloc_with_proto_and_callback by netconn_alloc_with_callback (since proto is not used) ?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Fri 04 Jan 2008 03:44:37 PM UTC, comment #9:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sun 02 Dec 2007 06:46:26 PM UTC, comment #8:
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 02 Dec 2007 06:27:33 PM UTC, comment #7:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sun 02 Dec 2007 04:58:19 PM UTC, comment #6: I just have a "problem" with the function name "netconn_alloc_with_proto_and_callback"/. Most (all?) functions prefixed by netconn_ were in api.h/api_lib.c, and functions prefixed by do_ were in api_msg.h/.c. Why this one is a exception? do_allocconn could be a better name ?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 02 Dec 2007 02:55:43 PM UTC, comment #5: The fix is checked in: recvmbox is allocated in netconn_new_with_proto_and_callback (in fact that's now moved to netconn_alloc_with_proto_and_callback) and freed in do_listen for TCP listen netconns.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 28 Nov 2007 01:52:55 PM UTC, comment #4:
|
Jonathan Larmour <jifl> |
Wed 28 Nov 2007 08:29:10 AM UTC, comment #3: So, the question is : is there any reference which say when bind have to be call?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 28 Nov 2007 02:52:06 AM UTC, comment #2: But as Simon says, this could be a response to something sent with udp_sendto(). There is no need for the application to bind in that case. (It's true that behind the scenes udp_sendto() calls udp_send() which calls udp_bind() if the local port was not yet set, but that's an implementation detail, and entirely unknown to api_lib/msg.c).
|
Jonathan Larmour <jifl> |
Tue 27 Nov 2007 09:43:42 PM UTC, comment #1:
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Tue 27 Nov 2007 09:27:58 PM UTC, original submission:
The recvmbox of a netconn is allocated in:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 3 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007-12-02 | goldsimon | Status | None | Fixed | |
Assigned to | None | goldsimon | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed |
Powered by Savane 3.13-02a9.
Corresponding source code
ok, good for me. I will integrate that in the warning.patch file