kity hong wrote:
> Hi,Jan
>
> In the source codes of ut_sock_init (void) :you can see this sequence :
> 1--> struct rtnet_callback callback = {cb_recv, NULL};
>
> /* create rt-socket */
> 2--> sock = socket_rt(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0);
>
> /* extend the socket pool */
> 3--> ret = ioctl_rt(sock, RTNET_RTIOC_EXTPOOL, &add_rtskbs);
>
> /* bind the rt-socket to a port */
> 4-->memset(&local_addr, 0, sizeof(struct sockaddr_in));
> local_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
> local_addr.sin_port = htons(PORT);
> local_addr.sin_addr.s_addr = INADDR_ANY;
> ret = bind_rt(sock, (struct sockaddr *)&local_addr, sizeof(struct
> sockaddr_in));
>
> /* set destination address */
> memset(&dest_addr, 0, sizeof(struct sockaddr_in));
> dest_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
> dest_addr.sin_port = htons(PORT);
> dest_addr.sin_addr.s_addr = dest_ip;
>
> /* set up callback handler */
> 5--> ioctl_rt(sock, RTNET_RTIOC_CALLBACK, &callback);
>
>
>
> it is the example from RTNET 0.7.0, does this implemetation register
> the reception callback after binding to the port? Is it a wrong
> order?
> this source codes applied in the slave. If it is wrong, what is the
> correct sequence of it?1-2-3-5-4 Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ RTnet-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users
