Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/9] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement OA TC6 configuration function
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Date: 2023-10-26 20:06:54
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-doc, lkml
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Date: 2023-10-26 20:06:54
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-doc, lkml
quoted
quoted
-struct oa_tc6 *oa_tc6_init(struct spi_device *spi, bool prote) +struct oa_tc6 *oa_tc6_init(struct spi_device *spi)Was there a reason to have prote initially, and then remove it here?The reason is, control communication uses "protect". But in the first patch there was no dt used. Later in this patch, dt used for all the configuration parameters and this also part of that. That's why removed and moved this to dt configuration. What's your opinion? shall I keep as it is like this? or remove the protect in the first two patches and introduce in this patch?
It will actually depend on what goes into the DT binding. If using
protections costs very little, i would just hard code it on. Maybe you
can run some iperf tests and see if it makes a measurable difference.
How fast an SPI bus are you using on your development board? If you
have a 50Mbps SPI bus, it does not even matter, since the media
bandwidth is just 10Mbps.
Andrew