Hi, On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 09:50:57AM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > Am 20.08.2016 um 15:34 schrieb One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> What it is not about are UART/RS232 converters connected through USB or virtual > >> serial ports created for WWAN modems (e.g. /dev/ttyACM, /dev/ttyHSO). Or BT devices > >> connected through USB (even if they also run HCI protocol). > > > > It actually has to be about both because you will find the exact same > > device wired via USB SSIC/HSIC to a USB UART or via a classic UART. Not is > > it just about embedded boards. > > Not necessarily. > > We often have two interface options for exactly the sam sensor chips. They can be connected > either through SPI or I2C. Which means that there is a core driver for the chip and two different > transport glue components (see e.g. iio/accel/bmc150). > > This does not require I2C to be able to handle SPI or vice versa or provide a common API. I don't understand this comparison. I2C and SPI are different protocols, while native UART and USB-connected UART are both UART. > And most Bluetooth devices I know have either UART or a direct > USB interface. So in the USB case there is no need to connect > it through some USB-UART bridge and treat it as an UART at all. I think having support for USB-UART dongles is useful for driver development and testing on non-embedded HW. -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
