On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 11:46 +0200, Michael Bruck wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:30, Øyvind Harboe<oyvind.har...@zylin.com> wrote: > > But why should we go for such an inferior and specif solution when a more > > general one is proposed and worked on? > > What are the speed/roundtrip time implications of passing all data > through the Windows socket interfaces for the TCP/IP solution?
I have posited that they will be unkind to the driver, but I don't know. > The dll wrappers (there are obviously two approaches which DLL is to > be wrapped) seem to have the lower performance penalty. There are options. But it seems that FTD2XX will be the preferred solution on Windows, and it may take a performance penalty to do so. Such is the GPL. I believe the very best performance will come by fixing libusb+libftdi, which is another reason that I have lauded it since the start. Cheers, Zach _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
