On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:40:45AM +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote: > On Dec 30, 2007 6:15 AM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2007, mgross wrote: > > > > > I'm playing around with a PIC based project at home (not an Intel > > > activity) and found I needed a usb driver to talk to the boot loader > > > so I can program my USB Bitwhacker with new custom firmware. The > > > following adds the pic18bl driver to the kernel. Its pretty simple > > > and is somewhat based on bits of a libusb driver that does some of > > > what this driver does. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Not to detract from your driver, but would it be possible to do the > > whole thing in userspace using libusb? Maybe by extending the driver > > you mentioned? > > > > The existing libusb based application works fine for PICDEM FS USB > or those based on it (like the Bitwhacker the OP is using).
The device ID's are different 0x000C in ldusb.c vrs 0x000b in the driver I just posted. Have you read my patch yet? > > Please do not add it to the kernel. There are libusb based application > for both the bootloader and the demo application and both are working > fine under Linux (along with Windows and I am trying to get FreeBSD > working). The libusb based FW loader http://www.internetking.org/fsusb/ program is nasty and didn't work on one of my systems, so I refactored it into a kernel driver and python program. > > Last time the demo application has been added to the ldusb and > I think it is not a good idea. But since then I've added patches to > the existing libusb application. > > Relevant discussion in thread > '[PATCH 70/78] USB: add picdem device to ldusb' > http://marc.info/?t=117770076400003&r=1&w=2 > > So please do not do this again. It is not a problem for the libusb > based applications after the patches but it is really not necessary. Why not? There are a lot of redundant things in the world. Linux is not necessary if you really want to take this argument to its extreme. > > Original libusb based application for the bootloader: > http://www.internetking.org/fsusb/ Yup thats the code. I found it way complex to read and felt a simple kernel driver and simple python program much nicer to my sensibilities. We are getting quickly getting into a fuzzy/ opinion, area on this thread. Is there a technical angle we can discuss? My LOC count of the kernel driver and boot loader is smaller than the fsusb thing. Also, with a kernel driver and a python lib, a GUI based boot loader utility can be had with little effort. > Original libusb based application for the Demo which > also includes my patch for libusb-win32. > http://www.varxec.net/picdem_fs_usb/ > > Updated Patches to detach the kernel driver for both > the bootloader and Demo application. > http://forum.microchip.com/tm.aspx?m=106426 > > Xiaofan Chen > http://mcuee.blogspot.com You blogging about me already? I wont comment on that. --mgross - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
