Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] gpu: nova-core: gsp: support large RPCs via continuation record

["Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@nvidia.com>]

On Mon Mar 2, 2026 at 10:06 PM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Mon Mar 2, 2026 at 8:42 PM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote:
>> Splits large RPCs if necessary and sends the remaining parts using
>> continuation records. RPCs that do not need continuation records
>> continue to write directly into the command buffer. Ones that do write
>> into a staging buffer first, so there is one copy.
>>
>> Continuation record for receive is not necessary to support at the
>> moment because those replies do not need to be read and are currently
>> drained by retrying `receive_msg` on ERANGE.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eliot Courtney <ecourtney@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp.rs              |   1 +
>>  drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs         |  41 +++++++-
>>  drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/continuation.rs | 167 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/fw.rs           |   4 +
>>  4 files changed, 210 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp.rs b/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp.rs
>> index 174feaca0a6b..ccf56f1ad246 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp.rs
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp.rs
>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>>  
>>  pub(crate) mod cmdq;
>>  pub(crate) mod commands;
>> +mod continuation;
>
> Looking at this series it seems more logical to have `continuation`
> under `cmdq` than just `gsp`.
>
> Nothing in `gsp` makes use of it, as it is an implementation detail of
> the command queue. And that way the `pub(super)` exports would be
> perfectly scoped to their user.
>
> Re-reading my review of v3, I am the one who suggested to put it under
> `gsp` - so this is my mistake.
>
> No need to resend just for that, I can fix when applying and this should
> have no impact on the patches that come above it.

I think we might have one more round on this so for now I have made this
change locally and will be in the next version.