Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/9] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement OA TC6 configuration function

[Andrew Lunn]

> >> -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