lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #7675, Enable to refuse data on a...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #7675: Enable to refuse data on a TCP_EVENT_RECV call
Submitter: | Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> | ||
Submitted: | Sun 13 Jan 2008 12:30:09 PM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Should Start On: | Sat 12 Jan 2008 11:00:00 PM UTC |
Should be Finished on: | Sat 12 Jan 2008 11:00:00 PM UTC | Priority: | 5 - Normal |
Status: | None | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | fbernon | Percent Complete: | 100% |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | 1.3.0 |
Effort: | 0.00 |
Jump to the original submission
Sat 19 Jan 2008 11:02:43 AM UTC, comment #11: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sat 19 Jan 2008 10:39:10 AM UTC, comment #10: After going through the changes made for this task, I think there might be another bug in here. Since it's only from reading the code, I might be wrong (then please tell me :):
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Mon 14 Jan 2008 09:10:17 PM UTC, comment #9: Check in with Jonathan corrections.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Mon 14 Jan 2008 03:18:31 PM UTC, comment #8: It looks fine to me - just a few typos and clarity suggestions I would suggest, hope that's ok:
|
Jonathan Larmour <jifl> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 05:11:14 PM UTC, comment #7: If you want to test it, add these lines in httpd.c, line 156
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 05:08:32 PM UTC, comment #6: I attach here a patch. I think it's good. Objections to check in ?
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 03:47:06 PM UTC, comment #5: I will produce a clean patch for that, like this, the recv_tcp will not be blocking, and we could have a solution for 1.3.0.
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 02:52:56 PM UTC, comment #4: Hmm, that sounds like it could work (although the pbuf_ref(recv_data) is not really needed).
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 02:08:26 PM UTC, comment #3: Perhaps "recv_data_refused" would be better than "last_recv_data" ? |
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 01:24:21 PM UTC, comment #2:
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 12:43:01 PM UTC, comment #1: In my opinion, the best solution would be to first call TCP_EVENT_RECV and only acknowledge the data if it returned ERR_OK. In case of an error, the data could be deleted and would eventually be retransmitted by the other side.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Sun 13 Jan 2008 12:30:09 PM UTC, original submission:
In task #7490, "Add return value to sys_mbox_post", we have see a problem with the recv_tcp callback (call by TCP_EVENT_RECV in tcp_in.c, line 308): when this callback is invoked, if the pbuf in argument can't be processed (mbox full, or any other reason), there is nothing in the tcp_input code to process this case: the pbuf will not be give in the next call to TCP_EVENT_RECV (so, we lost datas, which is not reliable like tcp should be).
|
Frédéric Bernon <fbernon> |
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 8 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2008-01-19 | goldsimon | Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |
2008-01-19 | goldsimon | Open/Closed | Closed | Open | |
2008-01-14 | fbernon | Percent Complete | 40% | 100% | |
Assigned to | None | fbernon | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
Planned Release | None | 1.3.0 | |||
2008-01-13 | fbernon | Attached File | - | Added TCP_EVENT_RECV.patch, #14793 | |
Percent Complete | 0% | 40% |
Powered by Savane 3.13-f8d8.
Corresponding source code
Sorry, just discovered the change in rawapi.txt which covers this change...
Can you somehow delete posts here? :-)