lwip-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lwip-users] Re: Assertion cp_input: active pcb->state != CLOSED


From: geckook Xu
Subject: [lwip-users] Re: Assertion cp_input: active pcb->state != CLOSED
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:11:25 +0800

Yes, thank you very much,
I know your mean, so I add lock in all the tcp_* callback functions,
but it did not work.
I want to add action of removing pcb at below code which is locate in
tcp_in.c lines 602
pcb->state = CLOSED;

but it did not work yeah, I don't know how to protect the stack
concurrent access , I think I tell you what I do before and now, but
no use.

because the action of stack concurrent access happen in where the
satck call the callback functions, so I don't konw how to protect the
concurrent access . Don't I need to modify the lwip stack code?

can you give me some advice about how to protect the concurrent access
and what should be attention to when use the raw api.

On 3/28/07, address@hidden <address@hidden> wrote:
Send lwip-users mailing list submissions to
       address@hidden

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       address@hidden

You can reach the person managing the list at
       address@hidden

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of lwip-users digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Assertion cp_input: active pcb->state != CLOSED
     (Kieran Mansley)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 23:19 +0800, geckook Xu wrote:
> Assertion cp_input: active pcb->state != CLOSED failed at line 170 in tcp_in.c
>
> I still can not solve this problem.
> who can give me some advice.
>
> please have a looke my code.

I'm afraid I've already told you what the likely problem is: you haven't
protected the stack from concurrent access by more than one thread.
Unfortunately I don't have time to go over your code and show you
exactly where you need to put locks.

Kieran





------------------------------

_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

End of lwip-users Digest, Vol 43, Issue 50
******************************************





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]