On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Michael Plante <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]
