Re: [PATCH v4 18/20] gpu: nova-core: add types for patching firmware binaries

[Danilo Krummrich]

On 6/12/25 9:19 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Wed Jun 4, 2025 at 7:28 PM JST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > If we can't patch them when the object is created, i.e. in
> > FirmwareDmaObject::new(), I think we should take self by value in
> > FirmwareDmaObject::patch_signature() and return a SignedFirmwareDmaObject (which
> > can just be a transparent wrapper) instead in order to let the type system prove
> > that we did not forget to call patch_signature().
>
> This one is a bit tricky. Signature patching is actually optional,
> depending on whether there are signatures present at all (it might not
> be the case on development setups). So involving the type system here
> would require storing the result in an enum, and then match that enum
> later in order to do the same thing in both cases - load the binary
> as-is.
>
> So I guess I would rather leave this one as it currently is, unless
> there is a better way I haven't thought about?

In the end the idea is to ensure that we can't forget to call patch_signature(), 
so even if it's optional we could do what I mentioned above, just that 
patch_signature() might be a noop?