[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: RE : [lwip-devel] [bug #19162]lwip_sendto:possibleto corruptremotead
From: |
Taranowski, Thomas \(SWCOE\) |
Subject: |
RE: RE : [lwip-devel] [bug #19162]lwip_sendto:possibleto corruptremoteaddr/port connection state |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:34:13 -0500 |
That's interesting. The benchmarks I performed showed lwIP performed
10-20% faster than our previously offered commercial stack :) Seriously
though, 10-20% is pretty minimal, and could easily be due to a
non-optimal lwIP configuration or sys_arch. It would be nice if Altera
kept supporting the lwIP port to accommodate open source applications,
but that is unlikely.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden
On
> Behalf Of Goldschmidt Simon
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 11:18 PM
> To: lwip-devel
> Subject: RE: RE : [lwip-devel] [bug #19162]lwip_sendto:possibleto
> corruptremoteaddr/port connection state
>
>
>
> > I will continue and terminate that Thrusday, when I will back
> > to the office. I'm currently in London for NXP presentation
> > and training, and it seems that several people are interest
> > about lwIP for Trimedia processor (the platform I use)...
>
> That's nice! What's sad is that I just saw Altera is now shipping a
> commercial stack instead of lwIP with its NIOS-II softcore processor
> (the one I use) :-(
> And they have a white-paper stating that the commercial stack is
10-20%
> faster than lwIP. I did not look into the application used for the
> benchmark, but maybe we can top that in a while? :)
>
> Simon
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-devel