On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:57:21 +0200 Daniele Lacamera <daniele.lacamera@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Antony Pavlov <antonynpavlov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> I will be able to provide such an interface by using a similar > >> approach to what you used for ping (so via net_poll() routine called > >> in a loop), assuming that your posix-like interface expects blocking > >> calls for read/write operations. > > > > Alas! We can't use this approach for tftp because tftp is a FILESYSTEM in barebox. > > Then again, I'd like to know if your FS implementation actually needs > blocking call, and in case, where is the code supposed to block. Does > barebox have some kind of support for multiple threads, or a default > event loop where background operations can be added? Or are the FS > calls non blocking? AFAIK barebox does not support threads. Also all filesystem calls are blocking. > Sorry for asking dumb questions, I am not a barebox developer and I am > just trying to figure out what is your execution model. There > certainly is a way to integrate my TFTP implementation as soon as I > realize what is your model: as for instance we have blocking POSIX > socket calls implemented with and without an OS infrastructure, and we > are able to realize blocking calls on any systems, being baremetal or > multithtreaded. > > Thanks > > /D -- -- Best regards, Antony Pavlov _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
