Daniel Ribeiro wrote: > Im working on adding Link Instruments MSO-19 support to sigrok, and im > struggling on how to keep the code safe for multiple device instances.
Good man. > The MSO-19 uses a usb-serial bridge, and except for hardware > identification, all the communication is done in the serial layer. That is incredibly stupid device design. > The hardware identification (usb layer) is needed to get hardware type > and revision, and to apply some "quirks" to the device calibration. > > The original windows software doesn't support multiple devices at all. > And would fail usb<->serial mapping if the user had another usb device > with the same kind of usb-serial bridge as the MSO-19. The only correct way to identify devices is using the serial number, as stored in a string descriptor referenced in the iSerial field in the device descriptor. > usb<->serial mapping using libudev .. > Should I add libudev as a dependency on linux builds? No. > Should I drop libudev in favor of libusb Yes. > and not support multiple devices at all? No. Use the serial number to distinguish devices. The device uses vendor specific interface so it is easy enough to program directly using libusb. I'm not sure that it really makes sense to use a kernel driver for this device. //Peter
pgpyOpQfDfyen.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database without downtime or disruption http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________ sigrok-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sigrok-devel
