[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0
From: |
address@hidden |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0 |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Aug 2016 20:17:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 |
Sylvain Rochet wrote:
Humm, the raw API didn't change much, so it should be fine.
I guess so, too. In any way, if you have the sources, you could even fix
it if it needs fixing. I hope it doesn't (unless you add IPv6, in that
case, it might).
However, the netif API changed… especially if you want IPv6. If you
stick to IPv4 you will probably trip over the administrative state and
link state rework
You can just set the netif's link up after adding, so that should work.
as well as some other flags,
Right. We didn't have binary compatiblity in mind, so after removing
some flags, some other flags' values have changed. That might still work
if you fix them up after netif_add() (which calls the netif's init
function)...
the netif struct changed as well IIRC so it's not ABI compatible at all.
Unless LWIP_SNMP was enabled for 1.4.0, struct netif should have the
same layout. But that largely depends on the enabled options in
opt.h/lwipopts.h... :-(
But what you could do is
to rename all netif calls and netif struct in lwIP and write a shim
layer between the symbols used in your blob and the renamed lwIP calls.
Fixing up the lwIP import symbols in the driver library might be nicer
than changing the lwIP sources (or else some other lwIP things might
stop working), but I haven't done this, yet, and it might largely depend
on the compiler used.
Regarding 1.4.0 --> 1.4.1, the only API change was in TCP, I think
(minor API change, struct tcp_pcb layout change). That shouldn't make a
difference for you, so 1.4.1 should be an easy replacement.
Please keep us informed and cry for help if you run into problems as
this is very interesting (to me at least:)
Simon
Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Sergio R. Caprile, 2016/08/09
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Sergio R. Caprile, 2016/08/17
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Simon Goldschmidt, 2016/08/17
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Sergio R. Caprile, 2016/08/19
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Simon Goldschmidt, 2016/08/19
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Simon Goldschmidt, 2016/08/19
- Re: [lwip-users] 1.4.0 -> 1.4.1 or 2.0.0, Sergio R. Caprile, 2016/08/22