On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Michael Plante
<michael.plante@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> pbhat wrote:
>>> I'm starting a new project, and debating whether to use libftd2xx (FTDI's
>>> proprietary driver), or libftdi (from Thomas Jarosch).
>
> d2xx is buggy, or at least it was when I looked at it a couple years ago.
> Subtle things, but things that nevertheless indicated basic
> misunderstandings by the people who wrote it. This applies both to the
> Linux and Windows versions.
>
It is still buggy.
One example is with the latest 1.0.4 version (unable to get latency timer).
http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2011-March/018434.html
Supposedly FTDI fixed this version but the fix has not been released to
the public. The website still lists 1.0.4 version.
http://www.ftdichip.com/Drivers/D2XX.htm
On the other hand, it seems to me libftd2xx has more in-depth use of the
libusb-1.0 async API and might have some advantages in terms of
performance. But I have not done any real meaningful benchmark.
In the case of OpenOCD, libftdi, libftdi-1.0 and libftd2xx have roughly
the same performance since it does not use the async API.
If the program is Linux only, I think it is better to use libftdi-1.0.
On Windows side, I think libftd2xx has some advantages, one is
the driver support, the other is the performance.
--
Xiaofan
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
