Re: [PATCH net-next 11/12] dt-bindings: can: renesas,rcar-canfd: Document RZ/G3L SoC

[netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found more severe
issue(s) in other patches of this series. This mail is only an FYI, in case
you want to address the nit picks below when you respin.

Low priority / nit picks for your consideration:

- [Low] When this commit is applied, the driver header comment in
  drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c names only RZ/G3S as lacking…

--

dt-bindings: can: renesas,rcar-canfd: Document RZ/G3L SoC

This commit adds the RZ/G3L (R9A08G046) compatible to the R-Car CANFD
binding. It describes 11 interrupts, 3 channels and at least 2 resets for
the new SoC. Like RZ/G3S, it forbids renesas,no-can-fd and
renesas,fd-only for RZ/G3L.

Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20261021-canfd_rzg3l-v6-3-b4abfdba8e70@bp.renesas.com

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/renesas,rcar-canfd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/renesas,rcar-canfd.yaml
> index 81674ea4bef47..dc74377021207 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/renesas,rcar-canfd.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/renesas,rcar-canfd.yaml

[ ... ]

> @@ -356,7 +379,9 @@ allOf:
>        properties:
>          compatible:
>            contains:
> -            const: renesas,r9a08g045-canfd
> +            enum:
> +              - renesas,r9a08g045-canfd
> +              - renesas,r9a08g046-canfd
>      then:
>        properties:
>          renesas,no-can-fd: false

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but with this patch applied the binding and the driver
comments disagree about RZ/G3L.

The binding now treats RZ/G3L as having no Classical CAN mode. It forbids
both renesas,no-can-fd and renesas,fd-only for r9a08g045-canfd and
r9a08g046-canfd.

The header comment in drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c still lists only
RZ/G3S as the exception:

drivers/net/can/rcar/rcar_canfd.c:
 *  - Classical CAN (CAN 2.0) only mode (Except RZ/G3S)

The comment above the mode handling has the same wording:

/* This controller supports either Classical CAN only mode(Except RZ/G3S) or

The next patch in the series, "can: rcar_canfd: Add support for Renesas
RZ/G3L", changes both comments to "(Except RZ/G3{L,S})". So once the full
series is applied, the comments and the binding agree, and this only
affects this one commit.

Would it be worth updating those comments here, or noting in the commit
message that the driver side follows in the next patch?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/20261110115112.3807247-2-mkl%40pengutronix.de