On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Xiaofan Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 1. It's said to be faster and it was faster than ft2232.c @ libftdi. I
>> don't have a comparison with ftdi.c though...
>
> I have done some comparisons last time when testing mpsse
> codes, mpsse is still faster than the default d2xx implenmentation
> as of now.
>
> On the other hand, ft2232.c is not optimized for libftdi-1.0
> and ftd2xx's asynchronous API. So the speed could
> be improved using ftd2xx's async API or libftdi-1.0's
> async API.
>
> I've seen one private ftd2xx mod which achieve similar
> speed to mpsse under Windows.
>

On the other hand, the mpsse codes can be improved
as well.

Peter Stuge mentioned here that  openocd mpsse code
only ever has one USB transfer pending. Pending more
USB transfer may improve the speed as well.
http://libusb.6.n5.nabble.com/Strange-issues-with-libusb-and-libusb-x-tt5710663.html#a5710672

Of course, there are other places of OpenOCD which
needs some tuning in terms of performance.

My suggestion will be keep ft2232.c but in the document
recommends mpsse and not ft2232 (either libftdi or ftd2xx).

-- 
Xiaofan

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
OpenOCD-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel

Reply via email to