Re: Ethernet over SPI driver for ENC424J600

Ilija Kocho wrote:

> John Dallaway wrote:

> >Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
> >>Hello guys, may be I miss something but I thought that any
> >>Ethernet eCos driver is enough abstract thing to manage ETH L2 and
> >>that does not depend (well, depends a bit) on any next layer,
> >>e.g., a TCP/IP implementation (RedBoot TCP/IP, *BSD, lwIP* stacks)
> >>even if the driver uses another channel (SPI) to get a memory
> >>access to MAC buffers.  I talk about generic io/eth/* stuff
> >>and..., well some kind of a future devs/eth/mc/spi/* eth_drv_.*
> >>routines, for example.
> >
> >In theory, of course, you are correct. The network abstractions
> >should ensure compatibility between any ethernet device driver and
> >any TCP/IP stack. But in practice, testing can reveal all manner of
> >issues which no-one was expecting.

Hello Guys,

Agreed. I just thought about those `eth_hwr_funs' for new ENC chip:
http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-latest/ref/io-eth-drv-generic1.html
and then for start a test-path would be one from

    io/eth
    `-- src
        |-- lwip
        |-- net
        |-- **newlwip**
        `-- stand_alone

Of course, that will be a choice of hardware keepers. But, looking on
the picture I see why Alex suggested to go by a way without asterisks,
because, "...testing can reveal all manner of issues which no-one was
expecting" :-)

> This is our first eCos driver of this kind and we take the
> abstraction and stack independence for granted. It may save us some
> effort and help bring the driver sooner if somebody more experienced
> points out potential potholes.

Ilija, which hardware (board) do you plan to use in a development? Is
that STM3210E-EVAL? Certainly, if target has not a lot of RAM, then
choices can be `lwip' derivatives then. On the other hand, two new
fresh projects (yours enc_eth and Simon's lwip-1.3.1) would help each
other in a self testing. Keep up the good work.

Regards,
Sergei