Øyvind Harboe wrote: >> Well, since it is more than five days old I suppose it is dead fish. >> > > I could have been more precise to say: it is much more work to > apply a patch later than sooner, ignoring the risk. > > It's balance. > > >> But I can tell you that all the state transition stuff works well, both >> in 7 state version and and shortest path. >> There are some issues about PAUSE -> SCAN paths does not go through >> CAPTURE, but this path is never used in the present code. >> I do not know about high speed ft2232h and ft4232h since I havnt got >> any such hardware. >> Reconnect looks ok but not tested. >> > > So is this a patch you have lying around? > > > I have it in my current "stable" work copy, based on 1606, together with some other small but potentially useful modifications that I am testing. Of course you can have a svn diff -r 1606. I have no I idea how much it is to get it into head and at the moment I would rather use my time for testing aginst this revision than playing catch up with a host of api changes together with uneccesary regression problems.
Regards Magnus _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
