On 6/27/25 03:15, M Henning wrote:
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.
Yeah, the GPUs that don't support GSP-RM can't hit the code that used
fwif.enable anyway, so the series should be fine as it is.
Feel free to add my:
Reviewed-by: Ben Skeggs <bske...@nvidia.com>
