Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. General Programming
  3. C / C++ / MFC
  4. Winsock problem

Winsock problem

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved C / C++ / MFC
sysadminhelpquestion
21 Posts 6 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M masnu

    Yes I can connect to the micro and send data from the PC to the micro but not the other way around. My socket is created as follows:

    // Create socket
    Socket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP);

    And then I wait for data:

    fd_set sckt;
    timeval timeout;

    // Set two second timeout
    timeout.tv_sec = 2;
    timeout.tv_usec = 0;

    FD_ZERO( &sckt );
    FD_SET( Socket, &sckt );

    int nRet = select( 0, &sckt, 0, 0, &timeout );

    select always returns 0 indicating a timeout no matter how much data I send from the micro.

    M Offline
    M Offline
    Moak
    wrote on last edited by
    #8

    If the TCP handshake is successful, you are actually sending packages from the microcontroller to the PC. This lets me wonder if the error you see is on application level, perhaps your socket code is not working properly, could be both client or server side. In the code snippet you provided there is no connect or bind/listen call, so I would not expect the socket to change status. 1) Have you tried connecting to your PC socket application from another PC (or via loopback)? 2) What error code do you get when connecting from microcontroller to PC? Timeout or something else? 3) Have you checked with Wireshark that TCP handshake is fine and packages are properly ACKed? 4) Which TCP stack are you using on the micocontroller (ARM SDK)? Could the problem not be Winsock at all?

    Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

    modified on Wednesday, July 7, 2010 11:05 AM

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M Moak

      If the TCP handshake is successful, you are actually sending packages from the microcontroller to the PC. This lets me wonder if the error you see is on application level, perhaps your socket code is not working properly, could be both client or server side. In the code snippet you provided there is no connect or bind/listen call, so I would not expect the socket to change status. 1) Have you tried connecting to your PC socket application from another PC (or via loopback)? 2) What error code do you get when connecting from microcontroller to PC? Timeout or something else? 3) Have you checked with Wireshark that TCP handshake is fine and packages are properly ACKed? 4) Which TCP stack are you using on the micocontroller (ARM SDK)? Could the problem not be Winsock at all?

      Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

      modified on Wednesday, July 7, 2010 11:05 AM

      M Offline
      M Offline
      masnu
      wrote on last edited by
      #9

      Sorry Moak, I was cutting and pasting and forgot the most important part. Here's the actual code to open and connect:

      int CHPCtrl::Connect()
      {

      struct sockaddr\_in	rmtAddr;
      

      // Create data socket
      m_Socket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP);

      if ( m\_Socket == INVALID\_SOCKET )
      	return 1;
      

      // Set client properties
      rmtAddr.sin_family = AF_INET;
      rmtAddr.sin_addr.s_addr = inet_addr( remoteIP );
      rmtAddr.sin_port = htons( m_nDevicePort );

      // Connect to remote
      if ( connect( m_Socket, (struct sockaddr *)&rmtAddr, sizeof(rmtAddr) ) == SOCKET_ERROR )
      return 1;

      // Open rx monitor thread
      m_hRxMonitor = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex( 0, 0, RxMonitor, this, CREATE_SUSPENDED, 0 );

      if ( m\_hRxMonitor )
      {
      	
      	m\_bConnected = true;
      	ResumeThread( m\_hRxMonitor );
      
      } //\_\_if ( m\_pReadThread )\_\_
      
      return 0;
      

      }

      And in a separate thread I wait for incoming data:

      UINT CHPCtrl::RxMonitor(void *pThis)
      {

      CHPCtrl		\*pCtrl = (CHPCtrl\*)pThis;
      int		bytes\_recevied = 0;
      
      fd\_set		sckt;
      timeval		timeout;
      

      // Set two second timeout
      timeout.tv_sec = 2;
      timeout.tv_usec = 0;

      // Monitor all rx traffic
      while ( pCtrl->m_bConnected )
      {

      	FD\_ZERO( &sckt );
      	FD\_SET( pCtrl->m\_Socket, &sckt );
      
      	int ret = select( 0, &sckt, 0, 0, &timeout );
      
      	switch ( ret )
      	{
      
      		case  SOCKET\_ERROR:
      			//Handle error 
      			break;
      
      		case 0:	//Timeout
      			//Handle time out
      			break;
      
      		default:
      			pCtrl->ReadFromSocket( pCtrl->m\_Socket );
      
      	} //\_\_switch ( ret )\_\_
      
      } //\_\_while ( m\_bRunRx )\_\_
      

      // Shutdown rx comm
      shutdown( pCtrl->m_Socket, SD_RECEIVE );

      return 0;
      

      }

      m_Socket is a class variable. I did this so I can send and receive on the same socket without blocking. Please let me know if you see anything wrong with this.

      M 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M masnu

        Sorry Moak, I was cutting and pasting and forgot the most important part. Here's the actual code to open and connect:

        int CHPCtrl::Connect()
        {

        struct sockaddr\_in	rmtAddr;
        

        // Create data socket
        m_Socket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP);

        if ( m\_Socket == INVALID\_SOCKET )
        	return 1;
        

        // Set client properties
        rmtAddr.sin_family = AF_INET;
        rmtAddr.sin_addr.s_addr = inet_addr( remoteIP );
        rmtAddr.sin_port = htons( m_nDevicePort );

        // Connect to remote
        if ( connect( m_Socket, (struct sockaddr *)&rmtAddr, sizeof(rmtAddr) ) == SOCKET_ERROR )
        return 1;

        // Open rx monitor thread
        m_hRxMonitor = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex( 0, 0, RxMonitor, this, CREATE_SUSPENDED, 0 );

        if ( m\_hRxMonitor )
        {
        	
        	m\_bConnected = true;
        	ResumeThread( m\_hRxMonitor );
        
        } //\_\_if ( m\_pReadThread )\_\_
        
        return 0;
        

        }

        And in a separate thread I wait for incoming data:

        UINT CHPCtrl::RxMonitor(void *pThis)
        {

        CHPCtrl		\*pCtrl = (CHPCtrl\*)pThis;
        int		bytes\_recevied = 0;
        
        fd\_set		sckt;
        timeval		timeout;
        

        // Set two second timeout
        timeout.tv_sec = 2;
        timeout.tv_usec = 0;

        // Monitor all rx traffic
        while ( pCtrl->m_bConnected )
        {

        	FD\_ZERO( &sckt );
        	FD\_SET( pCtrl->m\_Socket, &sckt );
        
        	int ret = select( 0, &sckt, 0, 0, &timeout );
        
        	switch ( ret )
        	{
        
        		case  SOCKET\_ERROR:
        			//Handle error 
        			break;
        
        		case 0:	//Timeout
        			//Handle time out
        			break;
        
        		default:
        			pCtrl->ReadFromSocket( pCtrl->m\_Socket );
        
        	} //\_\_switch ( ret )\_\_
        
        } //\_\_while ( m\_bRunRx )\_\_
        

        // Shutdown rx comm
        shutdown( pCtrl->m_Socket, SD_RECEIVE );

        return 0;
        

        }

        m_Socket is a class variable. I did this so I can send and receive on the same socket without blocking. Please let me know if you see anything wrong with this.

        M Offline
        M Offline
        Moak
        wrote on last edited by
        #10

        Looks good, but I have never used select() on Windows. Perhaps have a look at the questions I had, they might give you some ideas. :)

        Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M masnu

          Please elaborate as to which part of the post wasn't in "international" English and I will be happy to clarify.

          I Offline
          I Offline
          Iain Clarke Warrior Programmer
          wrote on last edited by
          #11

          masnu wrote:

          Please elaborate as to which part of the post wasn't in "international" English and I will be happy to clarify.

          "r" "u" Mind you, once translated from text messaging, it was a helpful question / answer. Iain,

          I am one of "those foreigners coming over here and stealing our jobs". Yay me!

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M masnu

            Hi, I'm trying to enable my ARM development board to communicate with a PC. I can establish a connection and send data from the PC to the micro without any issues. When I try to send data from the micro to the PC, however, my socket doesn't respond to the data. A network analyzer shows that the packet was sent and formated properly. I have tried both TCP and UDP with the same results. Has anyone come across this before? Thanks.

            M Offline
            M Offline
            masnu
            wrote on last edited by
            #12

            For those of you who are interested I finally figured out what the problem was. When I implemented the TCP/IP stack on the micro I made a mistake in the routine that calculates the IP header checksum. With an invalid checksum Winsock just disregarded the message. Once the correct checksum was sent everything worked fine. Thanks to all of you for your help. I appreciate it. Paul

            M J 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • M masnu

              For those of you who are interested I finally figured out what the problem was. When I implemented the TCP/IP stack on the micro I made a mistake in the routine that calculates the IP header checksum. With an invalid checksum Winsock just disregarded the message. Once the correct checksum was sent everything worked fine. Thanks to all of you for your help. I appreciate it. Paul

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Moak
              wrote on last edited by
              #13

              So it was not a Winsock problem at all. ;)

              Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

              M 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Moak

                So it was not a Winsock problem at all. ;)

                Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

                M Offline
                M Offline
                masnu
                wrote on last edited by
                #14

                Nope! It was a me problem!! :-) Thanks Moak!

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M masnu

                  For those of you who are interested I finally figured out what the problem was. When I implemented the TCP/IP stack on the micro I made a mistake in the routine that calculates the IP header checksum. With an invalid checksum Winsock just disregarded the message. Once the correct checksum was sent everything worked fine. Thanks to all of you for your help. I appreciate it. Paul

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  jeron1
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #15

                  If you don't mind me asking, which network analyser did you use that didn't display an incorrect checksum?

                  M 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • J jeron1

                    If you don't mind me asking, which network analyser did you use that didn't display an incorrect checksum?

                    M Offline
                    M Offline
                    masnu
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #16

                    I was using Wireshark, but it DID display an incorrect checksum. I just got busy doing other things and completely overlooked it. It wasn't until I focused on the problem that I paid attention to what the analyzer was telling me.

                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M masnu

                      I was using Wireshark, but it DID display an incorrect checksum. I just got busy doing other things and completely overlooked it. It wasn't until I focused on the problem that I paid attention to what the analyzer was telling me.

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      jeron1
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #17

                      Cool, the reason I asked is we have a similar project coming up, and a long time ago I ran into a goofy problem with a fairly early version of Ethereal where it didn't flag some field as having an invalid value, I lost a lot of hair over that one! :)

                      M 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • J jeron1

                        Cool, the reason I asked is we have a similar project coming up, and a long time ago I ran into a goofy problem with a fairly early version of Ethereal where it didn't flag some field as having an invalid value, I lost a lot of hair over that one! :)

                        M Offline
                        M Offline
                        masnu
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #18

                        I can see how that would happen. Thankfully this one didn't take me that much time. Try WireShark http://www.wireshark.org/[^] it's a useful tool.

                        M 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M masnu

                          I can see how that would happen. Thankfully this one didn't take me that much time. Try WireShark http://www.wireshark.org/[^] it's a useful tool.

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Moak
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #19

                          What wonders me now... that you actually have seen the corrupt IP packages in Wireshark. I was assuming you ran Wireshark on Windows PC and your hosts are connected via a switch, shouldn't the switch throw away the IP packages from the embedded board with wrong header checksum instead of forwarding them?

                          Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

                          M M 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • M Moak

                            What wonders me now... that you actually have seen the corrupt IP packages in Wireshark. I was assuming you ran Wireshark on Windows PC and your hosts are connected via a switch, shouldn't the switch throw away the IP packages from the embedded board with wrong header checksum instead of forwarding them?

                            Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

                            M Offline
                            M Offline
                            Moak
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #20

                            Oops I was thinking wrong. IP packages are OSI Layer 3 and network switches operate on Layer 2... so they couldn't care less about IP header checksums. Sorry for the confusion. Happy coding! :)

                            Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Moak

                              What wonders me now... that you actually have seen the corrupt IP packages in Wireshark. I was assuming you ran Wireshark on Windows PC and your hosts are connected via a switch, shouldn't the switch throw away the IP packages from the embedded board with wrong header checksum instead of forwarding them?

                              Chat in Europe :java: Now with 24% more Twitter

                              M Offline
                              M Offline
                              masnu
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #21

                              No.. I had my embedded board connected to the PC with a cross-over cable.. no switch.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups