Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] gpu: nova-core: gsp: add reply/no-reply info to `CommandToGsp`

["Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>]

On Thu Mar 5, 2026 at 10:29 AM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote:
> On Wed Mar 4, 2026 at 11:17 PM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Wed Mar 4, 2026 at 11:46 AM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>  /// Send the [`GetGspInfo`] command and awaits for its reply.
>>>  pub(crate) fn get_gsp_info(cmdq: &mut Cmdq, bar: &Bar0) -> Result<GetGspStaticInfoReply> {
>>> -    cmdq.send_command(bar, GetGspStaticInfo)?;
>>> -
>>> -    loop {
>>> -        match cmdq.receive_msg::<GetGspStaticInfoReply>(Cmdq::RECEIVE_TIMEOUT) {
>>> -            Ok(info) => return Ok(info),
>>> -            Err(ERANGE) => continue,
>>> -            Err(e) => return Err(e),
>>> -        }
>>> -    }
>>> +    cmdq.send_command(bar, GetGspStaticInfo)
>>
>> Also noticed something cool while rebasing the unload series on top of
>> this one: all these command helpers become one-liners and are not really
>> needed anymore! Here we can just make `GetGspStaticInfo` public and call
>> `cmdq.send_command` on it directly in `boot`. It removes a layer of
>> black magic and makes it easier to understand what is going on.
>
> I think this is ok, but we will still need some helpers (e.g. for RM
> control RPCs) that mimic the structure we have here. But there are a
> bunch of simple RPCs like this that can just be called without the
> helper. Do you think it's better to do this and have mixed helper vs
> direct call, or just go all helpers?

Mmm ok, let's keep the current helpers and reconsider once we have RM
controls and more visibility.