On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 3:13 PM Timur Tabi <tt...@nvidia.com> wrote: > You have a good point, but I think your change, in effect, necessitates my > request. Previously, the > default was no GSP-RM unless needed. Now it's yes GSP-RM, and the concept of > "need" has been > removed. So there's no indication any more that some GPUs need GSP-RM and > some do not. > > So to address that, I think it makes sense to add a warning if someone tries > disable GSP-RM on a GPU > that is not supported in that configuration. > > Now, whether or not we should ignore NvGspRm=0 on Ada+ is up for debate. If > I understand the code > correctly, today (and still with your patches), Ada+ would fail to boot. I > can't say whether or not > that's a good idea. But I think a warning should be printed either way.
This patch behaves exactly the same as DRM_NOUVEAU_GSP_DEFAULT=y kernels already behave. That being said, I'm not against the additional error checking here and can add it to the next version of this series.
