[PATCH] STM32 lwIP addition

[Gedare Bloom]

Squash, and send with -v2

https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/vc-users.html#creating-a-patch

Use --subject-prefix="PATCH rtems-lwip"

We expect there will be things installed. It is expected only one
network stack will be installed in a given PREFIX. We haven't quite
gotten to the point of documenting that expectation yet. You're on the
bleeding edge :)

Thanks,
Gedare

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 8:48 AM Robin Müller <robin.mueller.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I integrated most of your points and added waf support. The lwIP support can now be installed like the RTEMS BSP with waf so the PKG Config generated by the BSP installation can be reused.  It puts some folders like lwip / netif / compat into the include path, I hope this is not problematic. I'll send the updated patch with the disclaimer that there are still licensing issues to resolve after cleaning up a bit.
>
> Kind Regards
> Robin
>
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 12:00, Robin Müller <robin.mueller.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Small correction: I changed the ethernetif.c file to be usable by all three major APIs.
>>
>> Kind Regards
>> Robin
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 11:55, Robin Müller <robin.mueller.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Should I provide the changes for the code review as a separate patch or should I squash them again?
>>>
>>> Using the upstream unchanged is tricky because the code was taken from the examples and these examples are always targeted towards a specific API.
>>> I changed the version to be usable by both APIs. I now applied the __rtems__ preprocessor defines where applicable and moved the preprocessor defines into a separate file.
>>>
>>> Kind Regards
>>> Robin
>>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 22:21, Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 2:09 PM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 11:41 AM Robin Mueller
>>>> > <robin.mueller.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what happened, it looks like my email client garbled the
>>>> inline threaded reply. Hopefully my comments come through for you ok.