On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Michael Schwingen <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 06/06/2011 09:20 AM, schrieb Yegor Yefremov: >> Signed-off-by: Yegor Yefremov <[email protected]> >> >> --- >> tcl/interface/jtagkey2.cfg | 7 ++----- >> tcl/interface/jtagkey2p.cfg | 7 ++----- >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> >> Index: b/tcl/interface/jtagkey2.cfg >> =================================================================== >> --- a/tcl/interface/jtagkey2.cfg >> +++ b/tcl/interface/jtagkey2.cfg >> @@ -4,8 +4,5 @@ >> # http://www.amontec.com/jtagkey2.shtml >> # >> >> -interface ft2232 >> -ft2232_device_desc "Amontec JTAGkey-2" >> -ft2232_layout jtagkey >> -ft2232_vid_pid 0x0403 0xCFF8 >> - >> +# The JTAGkey2 uses exactly the same config as the JTAGkey. >> +source [find interface/jtagkey.cfg] >> Index: b/tcl/interface/jtagkey2p.cfg >> =================================================================== >> --- a/tcl/interface/jtagkey2p.cfg >> +++ b/tcl/interface/jtagkey2p.cfg >> @@ -4,8 +4,5 @@ >> # http://www.amontec.com/jtagkey2p.shtml >> # >> >> -interface ft2232 >> -ft2232_device_desc "Amontec JTAGkey-2P" >> -ft2232_layout jtagkey >> -ft2232_vid_pid 0x0403 0xCFF8 >> - >> +# The JTAGkey2P uses exactly the same config as the JTAGkey. >> +source [find interface/jtagkey.cfg] > Hi, > > this patch seems to remove the two different ft2232_device_desc strings. > Are these unused? > > If not, I don't understand how this is supposed to work. > > If the devices really can share one config file, then *one* generic file > should remain, and the others should be deleted.
I see your point. This won't function because ftdi_usb_open_desc_index() makes strncmp() and the strings won't match. So the patch was wrong. Sorry for the noise. The only question is, what description has jtagkey-tiny "Amontec JTAGkey" or "Amontec JTAGkey-tiny"? Yegor _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
