> More discussion here:
> https://groups.google.com/g/nuttx/c/bh01LHix7nM/m/bL8242BQCwAJ Johnn
> y is a
> pretty knowledgeable guy a references a couple of other RFCs there.
Thank you for the link to the discussion. There is useful additional
info:
RFC 2581 (4.2) says:
> Therefore, while a spec
Returning to KCONFIG :-)
I have talked to Debian kconfig-frontends maintainer Philippe Thierry:
https://packages.debian.org/stable/kconfig-frontends
He confirmed that kconfig-frontends is abandoned. They use own git
repository with version 4.11.0.1 as current:
https://salsa.debian.org/philou/kc
I think we should be testing with smaller, more typical user buffer
sizes to verify the performance when the split is disabled or removed.
> What is a full size packet?
RFC 1122 (4.2.3.4) says:
> the TCP can send a full-sized segment (Eff.snd.MSS
> bytes; see Section 4.2.2.6).
There is an algorithm in Section 4.2.2.6 how Eff.snd.MSS is calculated.
> That is another good reason to remove the unbuffered send.
So far I still think we
Hi,
yes, I think the code duplication should not be that bad. Having separate
drivers sam_spi.c for classic SPI, sam_qspi.c for QSPI in serial memory mode
(current implementation) and sam_qspi_spi.c or something like that for SPI
over QSPI would be an option then. Thanks.
Best regards,
Michal
