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 RTnet-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users