(In reply to Alexandre Courbot from comment #94)
> Created attachment 128093 [details]
> Log with patch 128091
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> Patch did not do the trick for me (log attached). Confirmed that
> 0001-nvkm_gpuobj-size-is-smaller-then-nvkm_gpuobj-size-ca.patch still
> succeeded, so apparently the method is not perfectly correct. Rather
> strangely the printk'd value of 0x100ce0 is 0x00000000...

Yeah, everyone, don't bother trying this.  This register is written by the
secure boot ucode, so the problem remains unsolved.