[PATCH 09/11] firmware: arm_scmi: Add bound iterators support

[Cristian Marussi]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 02:43:47AM +0000, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] firmware: arm_scmi: Add bound iterators
> > support
> > 
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 03:32:23PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > >SCMI core stack provides some common helpers to handle in a unified
> > way
> > >multipart message replies: such iterator-helpers, when run, currently
> > >process by default the whole set of discovered resources.
> > >
> > >Introduce an alternative way to run the initialized iterator on a
> > >limited range of resources.
> > >
> > >Note that the subset of resources that can be chosen is anyway
> > limited
> > >by the SCMI protocol specification, since you are only allowed to
> > >choose the startindex on a multi-part enumeration NOT the end index,
> > so
> > >that the effective number of returned items by a bound iterators
> > >depends really on platform side decisions.
> > >
> > >Suggested-by: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere at foss.st.com>
> > >Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi at arm.com>
> > >---
> > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c     |  3 +-
> > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c    | 58 +++++++++++++++++++------
> > --
> > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h | 13 +++++-
> > > 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c
> > >b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c
> > >index 15faa79abed4..d7df5c45836e 100644
> > >--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c
> > >+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c
> > >@@ -505,8 +505,7 @@ iter_clk_describe_process_response(const
> > struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
> > > 	struct scmi_clk_ipriv *p = priv;
> > > 	const struct scmi_msg_resp_clock_describe_rates *r =
> > response;
> > >
> > >-	p->clkd->rates[st->desc_index + st->loop_idx] =
> > >-		RATE_TO_U64(r->rate[st->loop_idx]);
> > >+	p->clkd->rates[p->clkd->num_rates] =
> > >+RATE_TO_U64(r->rate[st->loop_idx]);
> > 
> > Seems irrelevant
> > 
> Ignore this. I understand wrong.

Yeah...I will double check BUT the aim is to proper behaving while
filling up the vector when doing only a partial discovery with bound
iterators...in that case you want to fill probably only a subset of the
available slots in order like [0]:min, [1]:max...

Thanks,
Cristian