Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

make.dep/gcoap: remove gnrc dependency #13355

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kb2ma
Copy link
Member

@kb2ma kb2ma commented Feb 13, 2020

Contribution description

This PR is a simple followup to #12931 to remove gcoap's dependency on the gnrc_sock_udp module. gcoap already depends on sock_util, which depends on sock_udp. #12931 uses the sock_udp dependency to bring in gnrc_sock_udp only when the gnrc module is used.

This PR is the first in a series to allow use of the lwIP stack with gcoap, as you can see in my gcoap/lwip_for_example branch.

Testing procedure

Compile the gcoap example, and compile and run the gcoap unit tests.

Issues/PRs references

Based on #12931.

@kb2ma kb2ma added Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Area: CoAP Area: Constrained Application Protocol implementations labels Feb 13, 2020
@kb2ma kb2ma added this to the Release 2020.04 milestone Feb 13, 2020
@kb2ma kb2ma requested review from miri64 and smlng February 13, 2020 00:09
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Feb 13, 2020

Mh, but as a long as the stack doesn't use mbox it won't compile this way, right?

@kb2ma
Copy link
Member Author

kb2ma commented Feb 13, 2020

I had to pick a sequence for the commits in gcoap/lwip_for_example branch. Would you rather see ee1eede and e800be5 first?

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Feb 13, 2020

I'm sorry, but I have to honestly say: Neither! Preferably, I'd like to see gcoap not using sock-struct internal members, as it is intended. That's why I provided sock_async with the last release :-).

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Feb 13, 2020

With the current approach you just moving the problem further to lwIP. Any new stack implementing sock would now need to now add an extra adaption layer for gcoap.

@kb2ma
Copy link
Member Author

kb2ma commented Feb 13, 2020

I understand your perspective on integration of sock_async into gcoap. On the other hand, I needed to get gcoap working on IPv4 ASAP, and the solution here works today. I plan to maintain this work myself then, but added a note to #8130 for anyone else interested.

@kb2ma
Copy link
Member Author

kb2ma commented Feb 17, 2020

Closing in favor of #13386, but still need sock_async for lwIP.

@kb2ma kb2ma closed this Feb 17, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Area: CoAP Area: Constrained Application Protocol implementations CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants