Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] nova-core: Implement the GSP sequencer

[Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>]

On 11/10/2025 8:43 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
[..]
> 
>> +            |cmd| {
>> +                self.current_offset += cmd.size_bytes();
>> +                self.cmds_processed += 1;
>> +                Some(Ok(cmd))
>> +            },
>> +        )
>> +    }
>> +}
>> +
>> +impl<'a, 'b> IntoIterator for &'b GspSequencer<'a> {
>> +    type Item = Result<GspSeqCmd>;
>> +    type IntoIter = GspSeqIter<'b>;
>> +
>> +    fn into_iter(self) -> Self::IntoIter {
>> +        let cmd_data = &self.seq_info.cmd_data[..];
>> +
>> +        GspSeqIter {
>> +            cmd_data,
>> +            current_offset: 0,
>> +            total_cmds: self.seq_info.info.cmdIndex,
>> +            cmds_processed: 0,
>> +            dev: self.dev,
>> +        }
>> +    }
>> +}
> 
> You can do without this implementation by just having an `iter` method
> returning the iterator where appropriate (in the current version this
> would be `GspSequencer`, but I suggest moving that to the
> `GspSequencerInfo/GspSequence`).
> 

If I do that, it becomes ugly on the caller side.

Caller side becomes:
for cmd_result in sequencer.seq_info.iter(&sequencer.dev) {
 ..
}

instead of the current:
for cmd_result in sequencer {
 ..
}

Does it work for you if I remove IntoIterator and just have GspSequencer::iter()
return the iterator?

Then the caller becomes:

for cmd_result in sequencer.iter() {
 ..
}

Although I think IntoIterator makes a lot of sense here too, and there are other
usages of it in rust kernel code. But the sequencer.iter() would work for me.

Thanks.