gnrc_sock: provide asynchronous event implementation#8236
gnrc_sock: provide asynchronous event implementation#8236miri64 wants to merge 12 commits intoRIOT-OS:masterfrom
Conversation
This reverts commit 8ed775a.
miri64
added
GNRC
Area: network
sys/net/gnrc/sock/gnrc_sock.c
Outdated
| gnrc_sock_reg_t *reg = ctx; | ||
|
|
||
| if (mbox_try_put(®->mbox, &msg) < 1) { | ||
| DEBUG("gnrc_sock: dropped message to %p (was full)\n", mbox); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably this line should be:
DEBUG("gnrc_sock: dropped message to %p (was full)\n", (void *)®->mbox);
| #include <stdbool.h> | ||
| #include <stdint.h> | ||
|
|
||
| #include "event.h" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This probably should be:
#ifdef SOCK_HAS_ASYNC
#include "event.h"
#endifThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't hurt, though it is not necessary
miri64
added
the
State: waiting for other PR
|
This is more a memo for myself. I was testing tinyDTLS with this PR when I found myself on scenario explained on PR #8986. Oddly, without the assert being compiled my implementation was running (2 timeouts events plus the sock event). Anyway, after applying the fix, I got a new issue where Segmentation fault (core dumped) happens after _netapi_cb() is called. This is only happening with my implementation. I'll try to replicate my issue without tinydtls in the following days. |
|
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you want me to ignore this issue, please mark it with the "State: don't stale" label. Thank you for your contributions. |
stale
bot
added
the
State: stale
|
Yepp, can be closed for now, as there is a new iteration of asynchronous sock: #11723 |
stale
bot
removed
the
State: stale
3 participants
This provides an implementation for GNRC for the asynchronous event management for
sockas provided in #8149.