On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Peter Stuge <[email protected]> wrote:
> Laurent Gauch wrote:
>> I will try to correct the ft2232.c to get the same performance as
>> the mpsse based on Amontec JTAGkey-2.
>
> I would suggest to delete the ft2232.c driver as soon as the mpsse
> based one generally works.

The point of OS support is a moot now that libusb-1.0/libusbx release work
under Windows, Openbsd and NetBSD along with the existing Linux,
and Mac OS X (as well as FreeBSD which has its own BSD licensed
implementation), but there are still some OS (eg: Solaris) which may
support libusb-0.1 API but not libusb-1.0 API. Not so sure Solaris
matters for OpenOCD project or not...

Also I believe libftdi-1.0's async API can be an alternative to this
mpsse code.

>> the advantage to still have the d2xx driver support
> Please explain why is this an advantage?

Last time d2xx was considered to be faster but I am not so
sure it is true or not under current OpenOCD codes which
does not fully use the async I/O capability of d2xx.

But some users consider it a hassle to use libusb-1.0 under
Windows because of the driver switching (from FTDI driver to
Winusb driver). They may want to use OpenOCD together with
other tools (say IAR, Keil, Rowley, etc) which require the D2XX driver.


-- 
Xiaofan

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
OpenOCD-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel

Reply via email to