lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #7244, Add sys_arch_ticks/jiffies in...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #7244: Add sys_arch_ticks/jiffies in sys_arch
Submitter: | Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> | ||
Submitted: | Fri 24 Aug 2007 02:37:35 PM UTC | ||
Category: | Platform ports | Should Start On: | Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC |
Should be Finished on: | Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC | Priority: | 1 - Later |
Status: | Cancelled | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | None | Percent Complete: | 0% |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
Effort: | 0.00 |
Jump to the original submission
Sun 22 Feb 2015 09:12:22 PM UTC, comment #10: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 29 Apr 2011 09:20:51 AM UTC, comment #9: I want to port lwIP to a LPC1768. The stack has to run without operating system. I know that I have to write a new ethernetif.c therefore, but what is about the sys_arch. Is there something to do too? Beacause I read, that in this case no semaphores etc. are needed. Is there a documentation, what I have to do to port the lwIP stack.
|
Paul Preuß <ransepans> |
Tue 18 May 2010 07:16:11 PM UTC, comment #8: Actually, I was about to work on this as I already saw the negative impact of timeouts not being called because sys_timeouts_mbox_fetch() didn't wait long enough (< 1ms) under high load (which made my watchdog fail to trigger).
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 18 May 2010 01:37:50 PM UTC, comment #7: This doesn't seem to be going anywhere, so removing from the planned release. |
Kieran Mansley <kieranm> |
Mon 12 Nov 2007 10:55:57 PM UTC, comment #6: There is already sys_now() and sys_jiffies() defined in sys.h, but only used in some ports: perhaps we should remove them from sys.h?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 12 Nov 2007 08:15:08 PM UTC, comment #5:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 29 Aug 2007 09:02:51 AM UTC, comment #4: I'm agree, it's not to do for 1.3.0, I just wanted to not forget than, since it was "lost" inside some comments of bug #1902.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Wed 29 Aug 2007 08:58:10 AM UTC, comment #3: We don't have to get all breakage into 1.3.0 by any means, so lets delay this till the next release - it's a reasonably complex change that we want to get right rather than hurrying through, so I'd rather wait till be have the time to do properly. |
Kieran Mansley <kieranm> |
Mon 27 Aug 2007 06:26:16 AM UTC, comment #2: I kind of did the work already, but the 'wrapping and overflow' does need some attention... And it's far from complete, of course. Plus I don't really have much time currently :-(
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 24 Aug 2007 03:29:34 PM UTC, comment #1: Yep, Simon's hard work in that bug sums it up really, particularly as he described in comment #21.
|
Jonathan Larmour <jifl> |
Fri 24 Aug 2007 02:37:35 PM UTC, original submission:
We have already talk in several threads to add such concept in sys_arch.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
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 5 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2015-02-22 | goldsimon | Status | None | Cancelled | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2010-05-18 | kieranm | Planned Release | 1.4.0 | None | |
2008-03-25 | kieranm | Planned Release | None | 1.4.0 | |
2007-08-29 | kieranm | Priority | 5 - Normal | 1 - Later |
Powered by Savane 3.13-758e.
Corresponding source code
What's the purpose of this entry? We do have sys_now(), which is pretty much required when using certain features, so there should be no need for additional functions returning ticks/jiffies?
Closing as cancelled.