[En-Nut-Discussion] Fwd: Nut/Net (was Re: branches\devnut_m3n and STM32F2 devices)

Henrik Maier hmnews at proconx.com
Tue Feb 14 06:25:16 CET 2012 

Hello Guillaume,

Sorry I cannot supply a benchmark and my comments were not related to 
speed but to the richness and elegance of the Nut/OS and Nut/NET API. 
Nut/OS offers more high level TCP protocols and more network drivers 
than lwIP.

The fact that Nut/NET is tied to Nut/OS is not a disadvantage. Nut/NET 
was never meant to run on another OS. OS and TCP/IP stack have become 
one coherent system which is easier to learn and use than plugging two 
separate things together. As a result sockets can be used in a 
stream-like fashion for example to do fprintf on a TCP socket.

The lack of IP6 may be a drawback for some users, but it is not critical 
for me at this stage. If you require IP6 support now, than Nut/OS may be 
not be suitable indeed and lwIP may be the better choice for you.

Regards

Henrik


On 14/02/2012 1:15 PM, Guillaume Fortaine wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Guillaume Fortaine<guillaume.fortaine at devopspace.com>
>
> Dear Mister Maier,
>
> Thank you for your comprehensive reply.
>
>
>> I would suggest to shift this discussion into the Nut/Os mailing list rather
>> continuing it as private mail. The topic raised by Guillaume should be
>> discussed more broadly in the Nut/Os community.
>
> I am fine with this statement and I have just subscribed to the
> "En-Nut-Discussion" mailing-list :
>
> http://lists.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo/en-nut-discussion
>
>
>> Guillaume, you also mention ChibiOS in your mail. But we are talking about
>> Nut/OS here, a very different OS which for example does not require lwIP and
>> offers a far superior TCP/IP stack than lwIP.
>
> I would greatly appreciate that you develop your comment, if possible, please.
>
> Especially, could you provide any benchmark ?
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lwip-users/2011-11/msg00071.html
>
> "In fact, I have developed ftp server with lwIP, it works well enough ..and
> support FlashFXP and FileZilla utility.
> The download speed is 200KB/s and upload speed is 40KB/s in my Cortex M3 with
> spi flash AT45DB321D."
>
>
> By the way, from my point of view, Nut/Net has two main critical drawbacks :
>
> -No IPv6 support :
>
> http://www.ethernut.de/nutwiki/Nut/OS_Roadmap#IPv6
>
> "I recently looked into Adam Dunkels' uIP again, which supports IPv6. To
> me it doesn't look complicated. Quite the contrary, as it is limited to
> single layer only and a few variables. As a first action, I'd suggest to
> add it to the feature request list at SourceForge."
>
>
> *lwIP supports IPv6 :
>
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/CHANGELOG
>
> "2011-05-17: Patch by Ivan Delamer (only checked in by Simon Goldschmidt)
>   * nearly the whole stack: Finally, we got decent IPv6 support, big thanks to
>    Ivan! (this is work in progress: we're just post release anyway :-)"
>
>
> -Nut/Net is not easily portable :
>
> http://embedded-source.blogspot.com/2010/01/nutos.html
>
> "Nut/Net is designed for Nut/OS and not easy to port to other OS
> because it uses many Nut/OS specific calls."
>
> *lwIP has been ported to many RTOS :
>
> http://lwip.wikia.com/wiki/Projects_that_use_lwIP
>
>
> -FreeRTOS : http://www.freertos.org/portsam7xlwIP.html
>
> "lwIP Embedded Web Server Demo"
>
>
> -RT-Thread : http://code.google.com/p/rt-thread/wiki/Lwip_140_MigrationGuide
>
> "lwip1.4 Migration Guide"
>
>
> -ChibiOS/RT : http://www.chibios.org/dokuwiki/doku.php
>
> "Support for external components uIP, lwIP, FatFs."
>
>
> -tmos : http://code.google.com/p/tmos/source/browse/trunk/tmos/services/#services%2Flwip-1.4.0.rc1
>
> "lwip-1.4.0.rc1"
>
>
> I look forward to your answer,
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
> Guillaume FORTAINE
> guillaume.fortaine at devopspace.com
> DevOpSpace
> http://www.devopspace.com
> +33(0)631.092.519
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Henrik Maier<xxxxxx>  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would suggest to shift this discussion into the Nut/Os mailing list rather
>> continuing it as private mail. The topic raised by Guillaume should be
>> discussed more broadly in the Nut/Os community.
>>
>> So please post questions and replies to the NutOS mailing list:
>>
>>         en-nut-discussion at egnite.de
>>
>> Guillaume, you also mention ChibiOS in your mail. But we are talking about
>> Nut/OS here, a very different OS which for example does not require lwIP and
>> offers a far superior TCP/IP stack than lwIP.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Henrik Maier
>>
>>
>> On 11/02/2012 12:29 AM, Guillaume Fortaine wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Mister Prinz,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comprehensive reply.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I hope you understand that this cannot be our intention.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am fine with this statement. So do you plan to leverage the CMSIS
>>> RTOS API instead ?
>>>
>>> http://forum.chibios.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=272
>>>
>>> "Starting from version 3.0, CMSIS will define a specific RTOS API, the
>>> preview is already available here:
>>>
>>> http://www.onarm.com/cmsis/download/19/version-3-0-preview-of-the-cortex-microcontroller-software-interface-standard-cmsis/
>>>
>>> This API will allow to design RTOS-independent components. My idea is
>>> to focus the kernel development after version 2.4.0 on providing a
>>> compliant API, the new API would wrap/supplement the normal ChibiOS
>>> API not replace it, I still think it is particularly efficient and
>>> elegant.
>>>
>>> This development is interesting because it will possible to design
>>> complex components (file systems, networking stacks) without have to
>>> use a vendor specific interface. For example a stack like lwIP could
>>> simply assume that API instead of defining its own RTOS wrapper."
>>>
>>>
>>> I look forward to your answer,
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume FORTAINE
>>> guillaume.fortaine at devopspace.com
>>> DevOpSpace
>>> http://www.devopspace.com
>>> +33(0)631.092.519
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Ulrich Prinz
>>> <ulrich.prinz at googlemail.com>    wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Guillaume,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I need to agree with Uwe Bonnes statement. The whole team put a lot of
>>>> energy to get STM32 and later other CortexM based CPUs working in a
>>>> system that can be used free for any hobby and commercial development.
>>>> The work we did can only be done cause we can use the results
>>>> commecially. Unfortunately GPL license is (as Texas Instrument calles
>>>> it) a virulent license. That means that adding code that is GPL often
>>>> requires additional code directly connected also has to be converted
>>>> to GPL too. So GPL eats up part by part all code of the system and
>>>> therefore makes it impossible to generate a commercial code.
>>>>
>>>> You might say that linux is used commercialy too and I agree as I do
>>>> this myself too. But it generates a lot of development to keep your
>>>> core knowledge and your own inventions apart from the GPL linux code.
>>>> But it is possible to do it as Linux offers enough standarized
>>>> connections for your software that you then keep secret.
>>>>
>>>> Nut/OS is a system optimized for extremely small controllers, hardly
>>>> or impossible to run (uc-)linux. So your application software can and
>>>> must connect more tight to the system to work fast and efficient. With
>>>> GPL applied you will be forced to open lots of your application code
>>>> to everyone.
>>>>
>>>> I hope you understand that this cannot be our intention.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Ulrich
>>>>
>>>> Am 10. Februar 2012 05:27 schrieb Henrik Maier<xxxxxx>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Guillaume Fortaine,
>>>>>
>>>>> The libopencm3 is GPL and because of this not license compatible with
>>>>> Nut/OS
>>>>> and therefore cannot be used. I remember seeing discussions to change
>>>>> the
>>>>> license of libopencm3 to LGPL but this was rejected.
>>>>>
>>>>> See
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.hermann-uwe.de/blog/libopenstm32-a-free-software-firmware-library-for-stm32-arm-cortex-m3-microcontrollers
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Henrik Maier
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/02/2012 12:58 PM, Guillaume Fortaine wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Mister Bonnes, Mister Prinz, and Mister Maier
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First of all, I would like to wish you and the people around you an
>>>>>> happy new year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me introduce myself : Guillaume FORTAINE, Cloudpreneur :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/gfortaine
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have read with interest the discussion entitled "branches\devnut_m3n
>>>>>> and STM32F2 devices" [0]. Given that there is an Ethernet design
>>>>>> available around the STM32 F-2,
>>>>>> I would greatly appreciate to know if you plan to port the Ethernut
>>>>>> project to it, if possible, please  :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://cgi.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190638488534
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "ST Cortex M3 STM32F207 Development Board Ethernet USB Device/Host CAN"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, to quote [0] :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "What I thought I do for now is to create an new subdir under
>>>>>> branches\devnut_m3n\arch\cm3\dev called stm32f2 which temporarily
>>>>>> holds the drivers I ported across from the stm directory. Once that
>>>>>> becomes all stable and working I can work with the other STM32F1
>>>>>> developers to maybe merge those files into one driver set suitable for
>>>>>> F1, F2 and maybe even F4 devices. I like to avoid as much code
>>>>>> duplication as possible."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouldn't it be better to leverage the libopencm3 project ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://libopencm3.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The libopencm3 project (previously known as libopenstm32) aims to
>>>>>> create a free/libre/open-source (GPL v3, or later) firmware library
>>>>>> for various ARM Cortex-M3 microcontrollers, including ST STM32,
>>>>>> Toshiba TX03, Atmel SAM3U, NXP LPC1000 and others."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I look forward to your answer,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [0]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://lists.egnite.de/pipermail/en-nut-discussion/2011-December/013183.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Guillaume FORTAINE
>>>>>> guillaume.fortaine at devopspace.com
>>>>>> DevOpSpace
>>>>>> http://www.devopspace.com
>>>>>> +33(0)631.092.519
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> http://lists.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo/en-nut-discussion
>

More information about the En-Nut-Discussion mailing list