From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <45DC57F9.8000302@domain.hid> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:32:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] real-time ethernet References: <45DC4C85.8090807@domain.hid> <45DC51F8.7090508@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <45DC51F8.7090508@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland Tollenaar Reply-To: rolandtollenaar@domain.hid List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Xenomai-help@domain.hid Hi, Thanks. I think I will stick to CAN. I hope I achieve the speed. Could you possibly look at my tsc issue and give your opinion please? I am actually desperately waiting for someone to comment on that and obviously hoping that there are no severe problems to be expected if I run the user part built with; --disable-tsc and the kernel in 486 processor family. Regards, Roland. Jan Kiszka wrote: > Roland Tollenaar wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Again a bit of advice required. I have the choice of interacting with a >> remoteIO station via ethernet or CAN as well. I need CAN anyway for the >> sensor but I suspect that communicating with the remote IO station via >> ethernet might be substantially easier programming than doing this with >> CANOpen. >> >> Can anyone confirm this? Does anyone with experience in both prefer one >> or the other? >> >> And what can be said about this and xenomai? Would I use the standard >> sys/socket library or is there a real-time xenomai implementation of the >> same functionality? > > Check > > http://www.rtnet.org > http://www.xenomai.org/index.php/RTnet:Main. > > If it is simple to set up? Well, I'm probably the wrong person to ask... > > Jan >