On Wed Nov 19, 2025 at 4:17 PM JST, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 11/18/25 11:11 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Wed Nov 19, 2025 at 11:59 AM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>> On Sat Nov 15, 2025 at 8:30 AM JST, Timur Tabi wrote:
> ...
>>>> let sigs_section = match chipset.arch() {
>>>> - Architecture::Ampere => ".fwsignature_ga10x",
>>>> + Architecture::Turing | Architecture::Ampere =>
>>>> + if chipset > Chipset::GA100 {
>>>> + ".fwsignature_ga10x"
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + // GA100 uses the same firmware as Turing
>>>> + ".fwsignature_tu10x"
>>>> + },
>>>
>>> Following up the point I raised on patch 3, this could be another site
>>> where we use a potential `Chipset::has_bootloader_thing` or any more
>>> fittingly named method.
>>
>> Ah right, that's unrelated. In this case can we just express the
>> exception as follows:
>>
>> let sigs_section = match chipset.arch() {
>> Architecture::Turing => ".fwsignature_tu10x",
>> // GA100 uses the same firmware name as Turing
>> Architecture::Ampere if chipset > Chipset::GA100 =>
>> ".fwsignature_tu10x",
>
> I think that should be:
>
> Architecture::Ampere if chipset == Chipset::GA100 =>
> ".fwsignature_tu10x",
You are correct, that was a typo - thanks for catching it!
