I can confirm this also for kernel 3.19.0 on OpenSUSE Factory for a HP ZBook 5, NVIDIA Corporation GK208GLM [Quadro K610M].
See https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=919036

Some patch available?
Increased the severity to Critical since this prevents systems using nouveau from booting completely.

Created attachment 114968 [details] [review]
accept 0 from nvbois_extend

This patch fixes the issue for me.

I think I see what might be going on here.(In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #3)
> Created attachment 114968 [details] [review] [review]
> accept 0 from nvbois_extend
> 
> This patch fixes the issue for me.

I think I know what might be going on here, but I want to confirm before trying a different fix.  Can you grab /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/vbios.rom (replace the "0" for whichever is nouveau) and attach it here please?  You'll need to use your current patch to do this, obviously.

Created attachment 115044 [details]
vbois.rom

(In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #5)
> Created attachment 115044 [details]
> vbois.rom

Thanks.

Does your patch still work for you with the change to subdev/bios/shadow.c reverted (so, just keep the > to >= changes in shadowacpi.c) too?

(In reply to Ben Skeggs from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #5)
> > Created attachment 115044 [details]
> > vbois.rom
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Does your patch still work for you with the change to subdev/bios/shadow.c
> reverted (so, just keep the > to >= changes in shadowacpi.c) too?

It does, in fact I only need the change in acpi_read_slow (read_fast fails on my machine anyway #55948).

(In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #7)
> (In reply to Ben Skeggs from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #5)
> > > Created attachment 115044 [details]
> > > vbois.rom
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > Does your patch still work for you with the change to subdev/bios/shadow.c
> > reverted (so, just keep the > to >= changes in shadowacpi.c) too?
> 
> It does, in fact I only need the change in acpi_read_slow (read_fast fails
> on my machine anyway #55948).

Ok, good, thanks.  I'll submit a modified version of your patch with a more full explanation and to only do the ACPI changes.  The fast path will possibly have the same bug too under certain circumstances, so I'll keep that.

Thank you again.

I tried the > to >= changes just in shadowacpi.c like advised on the OpenSUSE build system, kernel 4.0.0. Before that, in 3.19 I had the same error like originally reported, with the recommended fix I still get in trouble on a HP ZBook 15:
--
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778565+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.402505] nouveau  [  DEVICE][0000:01:00.0] BOOT0  : 0x108390a1
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778565+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.402509] nouveau  [  DEVICE][0000:01:00.0] Chipset: GK208 (NV108)
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778565+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.402510] nouveau  [  DEVICE][0000:01:00.0] Family : NVE0
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778566+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.405997] nouveau  [   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] using image from ACPI
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778566+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406261] nouveau  [   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] BIT signature found
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778567+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406265] nouveau  [   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] version 80.28.52.00.09
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778568+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406271] nouveau W[   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] DCB header validation failed
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778569+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406272] nouveau W[   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] DCB header validation failed
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778570+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406278] nouveau E[   VBIOS][0000:01:00.0] 0xfffe[ ]: unknown opcode 0x00
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778570+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406282] nouveau E[ DEVINIT][0000:01:00.0] init failed, -22
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778571+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406284] nouveau E[     DRM] failed to create 0x00000080, -22
2015-04-23T22:57:04.778571+02:00 rkrell kernel: [    4.406509] nouveau: probe of 0000:01:00.0 failed with error -22
--

(In reply to Ben Skeggs from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Ben Skeggs from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Jan Vesely from comment #5)
> > > > Created attachment 115044 [details]
> > > > vbois.rom
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > > Does your patch still work for you with the change to subdev/bios/shadow.c
> > > reverted (so, just keep the > to >= changes in shadowacpi.c) too?
> > 
> > It does, in fact I only need the change in acpi_read_slow (read_fast fails
> > on my machine anyway #55948).
> 
> Ok, good, thanks.  I'll submit a modified version of your patch with a more
> full explanation and to only do the ACPI changes.  The fast path will
> possibly have the same bug too under certain circumstances, so I'll keep
> that.
> 
> Thank you again.

Thanks. I see it went to 4.1. Should I send email to linux-stable to add it to 3.19 and 4.0?

OP's issue is fixed. René, I believe your issue is bug 91402 -- a bunch of HP Zbook users there having trouble.

(In reply to Ilia Mirkin from comment #11)
> OP's issue is fixed. René, I believe your issue is bug 91402 -- a bunch of
> HP Zbook users there having trouble.

Hello Ilia, I cannot see any reference for a fix there. Bug 91402 is still marked NEW. Will this fix land in kernel 4.3 final?

Update: The nouveau driver still doesn't work on my ZBook 15 using kernel 4.2.3.

(In reply to René from comment #12)
> (In reply to Ilia Mirkin from comment #11)
> > OP's issue is fixed. René, I believe your issue is bug 91402 -- a bunch of
> > HP Zbook users there having trouble.
> 
> Hello Ilia, I cannot see any reference for a fix there. Bug 91402 is still
> marked NEW. Will this fix land in kernel 4.3 final?

Not aware of a fix for it. That's why it's still open and new. But it's your issue, rather than this one :) Add yourself to CC on it to receive any updates. This issue (i.e. Jan's problem) is resolved.

(In reply to Ilia Mirkin from comment #14)
> Not aware of a fix for it. That's why it's still open and new. But it's your
> issue, rather than this one :) Add yourself to CC on it to receive any
> updates. This issue (i.e. Jan's problem) is resolved.

Sorry, you're right.
There's another one open, see bug 90626.