Hi Marc,

Am Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:41:24AM +0100 schrieb Marc Kleine-Budde:

On 11.02.2025 14:12:34, Dimitri Fedrau via B4 Relay wrote:

quoted

From: Dimitri Fedrau <redacted>

[...]

quoted

+
 	if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
 		of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node,
 				     "clock-frequency", &clock_freq);

@@ -2173,6 +2185,7 @@ static int flexcan_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	priv->clk_per = clk_per;
 	priv->clk_src = clk_src;
 	priv->reg_xceiver = reg_xceiver;
+	priv->xceiver = xceiver;
 
 	if (priv->devtype_data.quirks & FLEXCAN_QUIRK_NR_IRQ_3) {
 		priv->irq_boff = platform_get_irq(pdev, 1);

please also add
	if (xceiver)
		priv->can.bitrate_max = xceiver->attrs.max_link_rate;

Yes, will add it.

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan.h b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan.h
index 4933d8c7439e62b5d6fcc445d88c2b5ccbfa13bb..56be40875eee24aee9297c4bc7c2fc4380e682ff 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan.h
+++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan.h

@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ struct flexcan_priv {
 	struct clk *clk_per;
 	struct flexcan_devtype_data devtype_data;
 	struct regulator *reg_xceiver;
+	struct phy *xceiver;

All other drivers name this variable "transceiver", does it make sense
to use this name here, too?

I have no preference on this, but my intention was to name it xceiver
according to reg_xceiver, so people familiar with the code would know
what it is about. I can change it to transceiver, what do you think ?

Best regards,
Dimitri Fedrau