lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #14051, Move select() implementation from...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #14051: Move select() implementation from sockets to netconn
Submitter: | Dirk Ziegelmeier <dziegel> | ||
Submitted: | Tue 21 Jun 2016 07:17:02 PM UTC | ||
Category: | socket/netconn | Should Start On: | Tue 21 Jun 2016 12:00:00 AM UTC |
Should be Finished on: | Tue 21 Jun 2016 12:00:00 AM UTC | Priority: | 5 - Normal |
Status: | Cancelled | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | None | Percent Complete: | 0% |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
Effort: | 0.00 |
Thu 09 Feb 2017 08:30:06 PM UTC, comment #2: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 21 Jun 2016 07:22:13 PM UTC, comment #1: Drawback: struct netconn increases in size for all netconns - basically its moving struct lwip_sock into struct netconn. |
Dirk Ziegelmeier <dziegel> |
Tue 21 Jun 2016 07:17:02 PM UTC, original submission:
This way, e.g. TCP netconns with multiple connections could be handled in a worker thread.
|
Dirk Ziegelmeier <dziegel> |
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 2 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017-02-09 | goldsimon | Status | None | Cancelled | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed |
Powered by Savane 3.13-f8d8.
Corresponding source code
By now, I don't think this is worth it. Plus how would we implement this given that users should be able to supply a callback function (we would need that for select).
Why don't we instead add zero-copy or callback functions to our socket API?