FTDI Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Advanced Search  

News:

Welcome to the FTDI Community!

Please read our Welcome Note

Technical Support enquires
please contact the team
@ FTDI Support


New Bridgetek Community is now open

Please note that we have created the Bridgetek Community to discuss all Bridgetek products e.g. EVE, MCU.

Please follow this link and create a new user account to get started.

Bridgetek Community

Author Topic: LibFT260 : unclear doc for FT260_GetChipVersion or strange coincidence ?  (Read 626 times)

ffred

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile

Hi,
in LibFT260 library documentation, the explanations are quite limited for FT260_GetChipVersion & FT260_GetLibVersion functions.
it only says : "Version 1.0.0.0 is shows as 16777216 in decimal" for FT260_GetChipVersion.

so 16777216 is 0x01000000 in hex > 01 00 00 00 for v1.0.0.0  ok, simple !
but in my soft I made a simple code for converting the value and got : v1.1.5.0 for lib version (ok) &  v2.60.2.0 (?) for the chip version.
your sample code "getting_started" was giving me 2.0.2.0 !

so I looked into your code and saw that there's a mask with 0x0F for each byte, which explain the result.  (but should be in the doc)

but is it really a 2.0.2.0 version or maybe a 2.0 version for an FT260, because it's a really strange coincidence to have 2.60.2.0 ..  :o

thanks
ffred
Logged

FTDI Community

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile

Hello,

Thanks for the information. I will check with our R&D team about this.

Best Regards,
FTDI Community
Logged

ffred

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile

I found something in "AN_394_User_Guide_for_FT260.pdf" (page 16, the description for bytes 1-4) which give some information :



I first thought while reading rapidly that it confirm what I was thinking, but it says 02 is the minor version and 00 the major version. so what, v0.2 ?
still not completely clear... (or maybe my english is too bad ??)
Logged

FTDI Community

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile

Hello,

I had confirmation from our R&D team:

You are correct.
The correct output is 2.60.2.0

We will update the correct code on the next release which is below for your reference:

Code: [Select]
// Show version information
    DWORD dwChipVersion = 0;

    ftStatus = FT260_GetChipVersion(ft260Handle, &dwChipVersion);
    if (FT260_OK != ftStatus)
    {
        printf("Get chip version Failed, status: %d\n", ftStatus);
    }
    else
    {
        printf("Get chip version OK dwChipVersion=%ld\n",dwChipVersion);
                               
        printf("Chip version : %x.%x.%x.%x\n",
            ((dwChipVersion >> 24) & MASK_1), //  ((dwChipVersion >> 24) & MASK_1),
            ((dwChipVersion >> 16) & MASK_1), //  ((dwChipVersion >> 16) & MASK_1),
            ((dwChipVersion >> 8) & MASK_1), //   ((dwChipVersion >> 8) & MASK_1)
            (dwChipVersion & MASK_1) ); //  (dwChipVersion & MASK_1) );
    }

    DWORD dwLibVersion = 0;
   
    ftStatus =  FT260_GetLibVersion(&dwLibVersion);
    if (FT260_OK != ftStatus)
    {
        printf("FT260_GetLibVersion Failed, status: %d\n", ftStatus);
    }
    else
    {
        printf("FT260_GetLibVersion OK\n");

        printf("dllVersion:%8x\n", dwLibVersion);
    }

Best Regards,
FTDI Community
Logged

ffred

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile

ok, thank you !
Logged