> I could change URJ_TAP_CABLE_CLOCK to use the new semantics of
> arg.clock.tms if we had only ft2232 cables. But I'm not sure we can also
> change that for usbblaster and generic cables or there is any benefits
> for those cables. I see URJ_TAP_CABLE_CLOCK_COMPACT as a ft2232 specific
> action. It is only generated in ft2232 cable drivers and gets handled
> there. So it will not affect the upper layers.

Ok, guess it's clear to me now. I also see a performance improvement of
up to 20% for certain tasks. So from my side it would be fine to
introduce this patch in trunk.

Thanks a lot
Arnim

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
UrJTAG-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Reply via email to