You are not logged in.
Hi,
I'm using an XPS 15 9530 with an nvidia card that reports as AD107M [GeForce RTX 4060 Max-Q / Mobile].
I've installed nvidia-open, nvidia-utils and nvidia-settings. The upgrade to version 610 seems to have broken the driver. I use the nvidia card in a PRIME setup.
For example:
~ ❯ nvidia-smi
Failed to initialize NVML: Driver/library version mismatch
NVML library version: 610.43Downgrading the three packages from cache seems to resolve the issue:
pacman -U nvidia-open-595.71.05-7-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst nvidia-utils-595.71.05-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst nvidia-settings-595.71.05-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zstI have also attempted to switch nvidia-open for nvidia-open-dkms, but that doesn't resolve the issue.
I am using an intel integrated graphics card as main card, and only use the nvidia card for gaming. Does anyone know what may cause this issue and how I might resolve it? Thanks in advance! :-)
Last edited by kyentei (2026-06-01 21:32:28)
Offline
Did you reboot after the update?
Does the journal/dmesg suggest your loading the 610xx module?
Offline
I did indeed reboot after the update. Dmesg shows the following:
root :: ~ ❯ dmesg | grep nvidia
[ 1.429425] nvidia: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
[ 1.429433] nvidia: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel
[ 1.495462] nvidia-nvlink: Nvlink Core is being initialized, major device number 239
[ 4.173861] nvidia-modeset: Loading NVIDIA UNIX Open Kernel Mode Setting Driver for x86_64 595.71.05 Release Build (root@)
[ 4.184678] [drm] [nvidia-drm] [GPU ID 0x00000100] Loading driver
[ 6.419237] [drm] Initialized nvidia-drm 0.0.0 for 0000:01:00.0 on minor 0
[ 6.419250] nvidia 0000:01:00.0: [drm] No compatible format found
[ 6.419252] nvidia 0000:01:00.0: [drm] Cannot find any crtc or sizes
[ 21.987135] NVRM: API mismatch: the client 'nvidia-persiste' (pid 1952)
[ 27.038841] NVRM: API mismatch: the client 'nvidia-smi' (pid 2647)
[ 31.828929] NVRM: API mismatch: the client 'nvidia-smi' (pid 3915)
[ 60.159904] NVRM: API mismatch: the client 'nvidia-settings' (pid 4966)Offline
You'll likely have the nvidia module in the initramfs and that wasn't updated (either at all or you forgot to mount the /boot partition and wrote it into the mountpoint)
Offline
I'm not sure if this is related, but `nvidia-open` does not seem to have updated the kernel modules:
root :: ~ ❯ pacman -Ql nvidia-open
nvidia-open /usr/
nvidia-open /usr/lib/
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia-drm.ko.zst
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia-modeset.ko.zst
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia-peermem.ko.zst
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia-uvm.ko.zst
nvidia-open /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia.ko.zst
nvidia-open /usr/share/
nvidia-open /usr/share/licenses/
nvidia-open /usr/share/licenses/nvidia-open/
nvidia-open /usr/share/licenses/nvidia-open/LICENSE
root :: ~ ❯ cd /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/
root :: ../modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules ❯ ls -l
total 9600
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 80200 May 28 11:22 nvidia-drm.ko.zst
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8203095 May 28 11:22 nvidia.ko.zst
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 776873 May 28 11:22 nvidia-modeset.ko.zst
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1827 May 28 11:22 nvidia-peermem.ko.zst
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 761404 May 28 11:22 nvidia-uvm.ko.zstConsidering I just updated the package, I would have expected the modules to have a timestamp of today.
Offline
You'll likely have the nvidia module in the initramfs and that wasn't updated (either at all or you forgot to mount the /boot partition and wrote it into the mountpoint)
Yep, that was it! Thank you :-) I will update my dracut pacman hook to also trigger on nvidia-open package updates!
Offline
[Edit: "for the records"]
stat /usr/lib/modules/7.0.10-arch1-1/extramodules/nvidia-drm.ko.zstls -l will show the modification time which would match the 610 packaging.
Last edited by seth (2026-06-01 21:33:50)
Offline
You're absolutely right. Thank you.
Offline