Comment # 94 on bug 94990 from Alexandre Courbot

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...