Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Expected only three 'NPDE' markers #7

Open
svenmauch opened this issue Jun 8, 2018 · 8 comments
Open

Expected only three 'NPDE' markers #7

svenmauch opened this issue Jun 8, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@svenmauch
Copy link

svenmauch commented Jun 8, 2018

Getting this output:

[mauch@M80 NVIDIA-vBIOS-VFIO-Patcher]$ python nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py -i mx150.rom -o mx150patched.rom
Opening the ROM file...
Scanning for ROM offsets...
Offsets found!
Running sanity checks...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 194, in <module>
main()
File "nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 172, in main
rom.run_sanity_tests(args.ignore_sanity_check)
File "nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 103, in run_sanity_tests
"footer, found %d" % npde_count)
main.CheckException: Expected only three 'NPDE' markers between header and footer, found 2
@Matoking
Copy link
Owner

Matoking commented Jun 8, 2018

NVIDIA includes MX150 as a part of the Pascal series, but the vBIOS format it uses seems to differ from the rest of the series. If I had to guess, it would have something to do with the card not being a PCI-e card.

This script works by using the differences between full (what you'd get by dumping the BIOS with GPU-Z or a similar tool under Windows) and partial copies (what you'd get by dumping the ROM under Linux) of vBIOSes. Here's a forum post on Lime Technology forums I posted about this.

If I had a full and a partial copy of the same vBIOS, I might be able to do the same for this GPU, though at that point you wouldn't need this script in the first place. I also released this script since I was able to verify that it works with my own GTX 1070, so I wouldn't be able to make the same claim of compatibility with the MX150.

@T-vK
Copy link

T-vK commented Dec 3, 2018

I have the same issue with the "GTX 1060 Mobile with Max-Q Design".
Is there anything you or I can do?

Here's what I did:

## Download the vBIOS of the GTX 1060 Mobile with Max-Q Design
$ wget https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/205874/205874.rom
## Download the script
$ wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Matoking/NVIDIA-vBIOS-VFIO-Patcher/master/nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py
## Make the script executable
$ chmod +x ./nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py
## Run the script
$ ./nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py -i 205874.rom -o 205874_patched.rom 
Opening the ROM file...
Scanning for ROM offsets...
Offsets found!
Running sanity checks...
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 194, in <module>
    main()
  File "./nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 172, in main
    rom.run_sanity_tests(args.ignore_sanity_check)
  File "./nvidia_vbios_vfio_patcher.py", line 103, in run_sanity_tests
    "footer, found %d" % npde_count)
__main__.CheckException: Expected only three 'NPDE' markers between header and footer, found 2

I'm hoping to fix Nvidia's error 43 for mobile GPU-passthrough with this.

@T-vK
Copy link

T-vK commented Feb 7, 2019

New Laptop, this time with a normal GTX 1060 Mobile (without Max-Q design): Same problem.

@waltercool
Copy link

Same problem with GTX 1070 Max-Q

@bubbleguuum
Copy link

Same here with Quadro P600 (Pascal based).

@solarkraft
Copy link

I have a 1050 Ti Mobile and the same issue. Is there anything we can do about this?

@S-trace
Copy link

S-trace commented Dec 24, 2021

Same issue with 1050 TI Mobile.
I extracted Nvidia BIOS from UEFI BIOS for my laptop, here it is
FX705GE-AS.307_NVidia_BIOS.bin.zip
.

@mjiang9999
Copy link

please try to dump the rom on MSDOS, not windows

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants