>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Jarosch <thomas.jarosch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Thomas> Uwe, On Tuesday, 6. July 2010 18:59:17 Uwe Bonnes wrote:
>> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Jarosch <thomas.jarosch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> writes:
Thomas> One thing comes to my mind: What happens to applications
Thomas> expecting the current behavior? I'm currently trying to
>> figure Thomas> out if this would break something. Hmm.
>>
>> At present, mosten no Byte is returen, but also sometimes some bytes
>> of the request, depending on rate and scheduling. So the application
>> must cope with the data even in the old behaviour.
Thomas> I take your word for it, applied :) I also included a small
Thomas> compile fix if async mode is disabled.
Let's get back reports from users. Hopefully my thoughts had no big flaw.
Any thought about Martin Zenzes proposal to have an API to query the
version. It would be good if applications could query the version to decide
if the old or new behaviour of ftdi_read_data() is available.
--
Uwe Bonnes bon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
