From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1DF23382E8; Sat, 28 Feb 2026 10:36:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772275016; cv=none; b=KMlaAwj4ZpU0gx73MAyqsZwBQNnKGCb4XFR+ag9P5xJ+xYhCRoNXS9XKgz8RXFUqf+eHPZRA+QBszqmZUB0nb+yErogTqvPenfEaE7DzicVvaQDu6e3FRQG1Qm5yCj3ATLL2LFGpy1ukUE04g01rg0xpm8zVocl5LmaaS+MkH3g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772275016; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ORBHh0BjScoohUVqvm3DceAaVU0nDtQEQF3h9Cj0jNs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bDXJEGSpFt8o5od8mUNPKQZFB0E3efL8fpgO9ZwBCLiRKHJvWhEBuXrnArknBMYWbh+Itj3NkctVlkdO2On1ikAK00mBpyLWijwjdPSCxBsHFJ05+wyfnMWXV+C9FMDjOrDkbg1/G56rggvbkzGUQOc+7LKCB7P6OtQxrGl0rQ0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD8711516; Sat, 28 Feb 2026 02:36:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2EB233F7BD; Sat, 28 Feb 2026 02:36:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2026 10:36:46 +0000 From: Cristian Marussi To: Peng Fan Cc: Cristian Marussi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, philip.radford@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, etienne.carriere@foss.st.com, michal.simek@amd.com, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, geert+renesas@glider.be, kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com, marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] firmware: arm_scmi: Make clock rates allocation dynamic Message-ID: References: <20260227153225.2778358-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20260227153225.2778358-7-cristian.marussi@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 10:29:11AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 03:32:20PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > >Leveraging SCMI Clock protocol dynamic discovery capabilities, move away > >from the static per-clock rates allocation model in favour of a dynamic > >runtime allocation based on effectively discovered resources. > > > >No functional change. > > > >Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi > >--- > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++--- > > include/linux/scmi_protocol.h | 1 - > > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c > >index f5d1c608f85a..d0fb5affb5cf 100644 > >--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c > >+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c > >@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ struct scmi_clock_desc { > > u32 id; > > bool rate_discrete; > > unsigned int num_rates; > >- u64 rates[SCMI_MAX_NUM_RATES]; > >+ u64 *rates; > > #define RATE_MIN 0 > > #define RATE_MAX 1 > > #define RATE_STEP 2 > >@@ -480,6 +480,18 @@ iter_clk_describe_update_state(struct scmi_iterator_state *st, > > QUIRK_OUT_OF_SPEC_TRIPLET); > > } > > > >+ if (!st->max_resources) { > >+ int num_rates = st->num_returned + st->num_remaining; > >+ > >+ p->clkd->rates = devm_kcalloc(p->dev, num_rates, > >+ sizeof(*p->clkd->rates), GFP_KERNEL); > >+ if (!p->clkd->rates) > >+ return -ENOMEM; > > It may be not related to this patch, > I see scmi_clock_describe_rates_get() does not have return value check > when being called in scmi_clock_protocol_init(). > > So if devm_kcalloc() fails, there maybe issue without a sanity check > to return value of scmi_clock_describe_rates_get(). > Yes I think I saw that...wanted to fix too..and forgot :D I will add a fix in V2. Thanks, Cristian