Default lwipopts

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Default lwipopts

Kieran Mansley
There have been a fair number of queries to the mailing list recently
that have boiled down to the default lwipopts being unsuitable for
general usage.  They are set extremely conservatively, which might lead
people who are new to lwIP to think that the stack is at worst broken or
at best much lower performing than is the case.

I propose we provide two lwipopts configuration files:
 - the first would be much like the current with an emphasis on low
memory footprint at the cost of performance.
 - the second would have, for most people, what are more sensible
defaults allowing them to achieve much better performance.

Does anyone have any particular thoughts or suggestions on this?

Kieran  



_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Default lwipopts

JamminJimP
Kieran,

I agree that changing the defaults to be more generally applicable is
probably a good idea(even most small embedded systems are seeing more
RAM/ROM available these days).

Perhaps rather than a separate file, maybe it would be less invasive and
clearer to new users if we were to add a TINY_FOOTPRINT switch to the
existing file that would define the current minimum (conservative)
setting defaults?

i.e.
----------------------------
#undef TINY_FOOTPRINT  // DEFINE for very resource-limited targets

#ifdef TINY_FOOTPRINT
.
(old values here)
.
#else
.
(more reasonable default values here)
.
#endif
----------------------------

Just my initial thoughts... criticism and better ideas are encouraged.

- Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: lwip-users-bounces+jim.pettinato=[hidden email]
[mailto:lwip-users-bounces+jim.pettinato=[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Kieran Mansley
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 4:49 AM
To: Mailing list for lwIP users
Subject: [lwip-users] Default lwipopts


There have been a fair number of queries to the mailing list recently
that have boiled down to the default lwipopts being unsuitable for
general usage.  They are set extremely conservatively, which might lead
people who are new to lwIP to think that the stack is at worst broken or
at best much lower performing than is the case.

I propose we provide two lwipopts configuration files:
 - the first would be much like the current with an emphasis on low
memory footprint at the cost of performance.
 - the second would have, for most people, what are more sensible
defaults allowing them to achieve much better performance.

Does anyone have any particular thoughts or suggestions on this?

Kieran  



_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users


_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Default lwipopts

Bernhard Pöss
Did you guys follow up on that ?

-Bernhard

On 1/17/07, Pettinato, Jim <[hidden email]> wrote:
Kieran,

I agree that changing the defaults to be more generally applicable is
probably a good idea(even most small embedded systems are seeing more
RAM/ROM available these days).

Perhaps rather than a separate file, maybe it would be less invasive and
clearer to new users if we were to add a TINY_FOOTPRINT switch to the
existing file that would define the current minimum (conservative)
setting defaults?

i.e.
----------------------------
#undef TINY_FOOTPRINT  // DEFINE for very resource-limited targets

#ifdef TINY_FOOTPRINT
.
(old values here)
.
#else
.
(more reasonable default values here)
.
#endif
----------------------------

Just my initial thoughts... criticism and better ideas are encouraged.

- Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: lwip-users-bounces+jim.pettinato=[hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Kieran Mansley
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 4:49 AM
To: Mailing list for lwIP users
Subject: [lwip-users] Default lwipopts


There have been a fair number of queries to the mailing list recently
that have boiled down to the default lwipopts being unsuitable for
general usage.  They are set extremely conservatively, which might lead
people who are new to lwIP to think that the stack is at worst broken or
at best much lower performing than is the case.

I propose we provide two lwipopts configuration files:
- the first would be much like the current with an emphasis on low
memory footprint at the cost of performance.
- the second would have, for most people, what are more sensible
defaults allowing them to achieve much better performance.

Does anyone have any particular thoughts or suggestions on this?

Kieran



_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users


_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users


_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Default lwipopts

Kieran Mansley
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 21:12 +0100, Bernhard Poess wrote:
> Did you guys follow up on that ?

Not yet.

Kieran



_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users