Nouveau - Nov 2025 - [PATCH v2 08/12] nova-core: sequencer: Add register opcodes

> On Nov 4, 2025, at 9:50?PM, John Hubbard <jhubbard at nvidia.com>
wrote:
> 
> ?On 11/2/25 3:59 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> These opcodes are used for register write, modify, poll and store
(save)
>> sequencer operations.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf at nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/sequencer.rs | 138 +++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> ...
>> @@ -83,12 +116,103 @@ pub(crate) trait GspSeqCmdRunner {
>>     fn run(&self, sequencer: &GspSequencer<'_>) ->
Result;
>> }
>> 
>> -impl GspSeqCmdRunner for GspSeqCmd {
>> -    fn run(&self, _seq: &GspSequencer<'_>) ->
Result {
>> +impl GspSeqCmdRunner for fw::GSP_SEQ_BUF_PAYLOAD_REG_WRITE {
>> +    fn run(&self, sequencer: &GspSequencer<'_>)
-> Result {
>> +        dev_dbg!(
>> +            sequencer.dev,
>> +            "RegWrite: addr=0x{:x}, val=0x{:x}\n",
> 
> Hi Joel,
> 
> The RegRead, RegWrite, RegPoll prints generate over 400 lines
> per GPU, into the logs. This is too much, especially now that
> it's been working for a while.
> 
> I'm thinking let's delete these entirely. If we somehow get
> into debugging this aspect of the sequencer, we can temporarily
> add whatever printing we need, but I think it's one notch too
> far for the final product, now that you have it working.
Sure John, I am Ok with removing the prints. I will do so for the next spin.

Thanks.



> 
> 
> thanks,
> --
> John Hubbard
>

On Wed, 2025-11-05 at 03:45 +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > +??????? dev_dbg!(
> > > +??????????? sequencer.dev,
> > > +??????????? "RegWrite: addr=0x{:x}, val=0x{:x}\n",
> > 
> > Hi Joel,
> > 
> > The RegRead, RegWrite, RegPoll prints generate over 400 lines
> > per GPU, into the logs. This is too much, especially now that
> > it's been working for a while.
> > 
> > I'm thinking let's delete these entirely. If we somehow get
> > into debugging this aspect of the sequencer, we can temporarily
> > add whatever printing we need, but I think it's one notch too
> > far for the final product, now that you have it working.
> 
> Sure John, I am Ok with removing the prints. I will do so for the next
spin.
Or, you could do what Nouveau does, and define two more printk levels below DBG
specifically for
stuff like this:

#define nvdev_trace(d,f,a...) nvdev_printk((d), TRACE,   info, f, ##a)
#define nvdev_spam(d,f,a...)  nvdev_printk((d),  SPAM,    dbg, f, ##a)