.../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/firmware/imx/sm-misc.c | 37 +++++++++- include/linux/scmi_imx_protocol.h | 2 + 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This is the patch 5 and 6 from patchset [1] with switching to using raw
dump, per check with Sudeep and NXP i.MX SM firmware owner
System Manager firmware provides API to dump system log information.
So add the interface for Linux to retrieve the information.
In patch 1, I drop the two structures compared to patch 5 in [1]:
struct scmi_imx_misc_sys_sleep_rec
struct scmi_imx_misc_syslog
No other changes in this patch.
In patch 2, I switched to use debugfs to do raw dump the syslog, compared
with patch 6 in [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/PAXPR04MB845937237E3C1AF5A2ABA8FA880CA@PAXPR04MB8459.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com/T/#m6ed303ac9c584c6e2ab39f89359f3131b
dfcc9e5
Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
---
Changes in v3:
- Rebased to next-20251028
- Drop unused variable to avoid build warning reported by kernel test robot
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/20251011-sm-syslog-v2-1-v2-0-f43a3f6b32e4@nxp.com/
Changes in v2:
- Rebased to next-20251010
- Patch 2: Remove the IS_ERR check for debugfs_create_dir per Dan Carpenter
Change 'return 0' to 'return devm_add_action_or_reset'
Drop the size check
Include 'linux/sizes.h' to avoid build break
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250910-sm-syslog-v1-0-5b36f8f21da6@nxp.com
---
Peng Fan (2):
firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support getting syslog of MISC protocol
firmware: imx: sm-misc: Dump syslog info
.../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/firmware/imx/sm-misc.c | 37 +++++++++-
include/linux/scmi_imx_protocol.h | 2 +
3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
---
base-commit: f7d2388eeec24966fc4d5cf32d706f0514f29ac5
change-id: 20251029-sm-syslog-v3-0143f85b0ce6
Best regards,
--
Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Hi Sudeep, Cristian Just checking in - did you get a chance to review this patchset? Please let me know if you need any additional details or context. Thanks, Peng On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 08:07:00PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: >This is the patch 5 and 6 from patchset [1] with switching to using raw >dump, per check with Sudeep and NXP i.MX SM firmware owner > >System Manager firmware provides API to dump system log information. >So add the interface for Linux to retrieve the information. > >In patch 1, I drop the two structures compared to patch 5 in [1]: >struct scmi_imx_misc_sys_sleep_rec >struct scmi_imx_misc_syslog >No other changes in this patch. > >In patch 2, I switched to use debugfs to do raw dump the syslog, compared >with patch 6 in [1]. > >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/PAXPR04MB845937237E3C1AF5A2ABA8FA880CA@PAXPR04MB8459.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com/T/#m6ed303ac9c584c6e2ab39f89359f3131b >dfcc9e5 > >Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >--- >Changes in v3: >- Rebased to next-20251028 >- Drop unused variable to avoid build warning reported by kernel test robot >- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/20251011-sm-syslog-v2-1-v2-0-f43a3f6b32e4@nxp.com/ > >Changes in v2: >- Rebased to next-20251010 >- Patch 2: Remove the IS_ERR check for debugfs_create_dir per Dan Carpenter > Change 'return 0' to 'return devm_add_action_or_reset' > Drop the size check > Include 'linux/sizes.h' to avoid build break >- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250910-sm-syslog-v1-0-5b36f8f21da6@nxp.com > >--- >Peng Fan (2): > firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support getting syslog of MISC protocol > firmware: imx: sm-misc: Dump syslog info > > .../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/firmware/imx/sm-misc.c | 37 +++++++++- > include/linux/scmi_imx_protocol.h | 2 + > 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >--- >base-commit: f7d2388eeec24966fc4d5cf32d706f0514f29ac5 >change-id: 20251029-sm-syslog-v3-0143f85b0ce6 > >Best regards, >-- >Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >
Hi Sudeep, Hope you're doing well. Apologies for following up again, but this v3 patchset has been pending for quite some time. I wanted to check if everything looks good on your end. Could you please confirm whether you plan to pick both patches? Or do you need an A-b from the i.MX maintainer for patch 2? Alternatively, I can ask Shawn to pick patch 2 if you only intend to take patch 1. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks, Peng On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 09:16:23AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: >Hi Sudeep, Cristian > >Just checking in - did you get a chance to review this patchset? >Please let me know if you need any additional details or context. > >Thanks, >Peng >On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 08:07:00PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: >>This is the patch 5 and 6 from patchset [1] with switching to using raw >>dump, per check with Sudeep and NXP i.MX SM firmware owner >> >>System Manager firmware provides API to dump system log information. >>So add the interface for Linux to retrieve the information. >> >>In patch 1, I drop the two structures compared to patch 5 in [1]: >>struct scmi_imx_misc_sys_sleep_rec >>struct scmi_imx_misc_syslog >>No other changes in this patch. >> >>In patch 2, I switched to use debugfs to do raw dump the syslog, compared >>with patch 6 in [1]. >> >>[1] https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/PAXPR04MB845937237E3C1AF5A2ABA8FA880CA@PAXPR04MB8459.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com/T/#m6ed303ac9c584c6e2ab39f89359f3131b >>dfcc9e5 >> >>Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >>--- >>Changes in v3: >>- Rebased to next-20251028 >>- Drop unused variable to avoid build warning reported by kernel test robot >>- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/arm-scmi/20251011-sm-syslog-v2-1-v2-0-f43a3f6b32e4@nxp.com/ >> >>Changes in v2: >>- Rebased to next-20251010 >>- Patch 2: Remove the IS_ERR check for debugfs_create_dir per Dan Carpenter >> Change 'return 0' to 'return devm_add_action_or_reset' >> Drop the size check >> Include 'linux/sizes.h' to avoid build break >>- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250910-sm-syslog-v1-0-5b36f8f21da6@nxp.com >> >>--- >>Peng Fan (2): >> firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support getting syslog of MISC protocol >> firmware: imx: sm-misc: Dump syslog info >> >> .../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/firmware/imx/sm-misc.c | 37 +++++++++- >> include/linux/scmi_imx_protocol.h | 2 + >> 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>--- >>base-commit: f7d2388eeec24966fc4d5cf32d706f0514f29ac5 >>change-id: 20251029-sm-syslog-v3-0143f85b0ce6 >> >>Best regards, >>-- >>Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >> >
On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 08:49:24PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Sudeep, > > Hope you're doing well. Apologies for following up again, but this v3 patchset > has been pending for quite some time. I wanted to check if everything looks > good on your end. > Yes overall it looks good to me. > Could you please confirm whether you plan to pick both patches? As I had asked once in previous version, I need i.MX maintainer ACK to pick it up myself. > Or do you need an A-b from the i.MX maintainer for patch 2? Yes as mentioned above. > Alternatively, I can ask Shawn to pick patch 2 if you only intend to take patch 1. I think that would break build or need to wait for another cycle. I can ack if it can be routed via i.MX tree or need ACK to pick it up myself. -- Regards, Sudeep
On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 03:46:29PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 08:49:24PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: >> Hi Sudeep, >> >> Hope you're doing well. Apologies for following up again, but this v3 patchset >> has been pending for quite some time. I wanted to check if everything looks >> good on your end. >> > >Yes overall it looks good to me. Thanks a lot. > ... >> Alternatively, I can ask Shawn to pick patch 2 if you only intend to take patch 1. > >I think that would break build or need to wait for another cycle. >I can ack if it can be routed via i.MX tree or need ACK to pick it up myself. Shawn, Do you plan to pick the two patches with Sudeep's Ack in patch 1? Or you prefer to route the patches via SCMI tree with your Ack? Thanks, Peng > >-- >Regards, >Sudeep
On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 09:34:47AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 03:46:29PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > >On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 08:49:24PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > >> Hi Sudeep, > >> > >> Hope you're doing well. Apologies for following up again, but this v3 patchset > >> has been pending for quite some time. I wanted to check if everything looks > >> good on your end. > >> > > > >Yes overall it looks good to me. > > Thanks a lot. > > > > ... > >> Alternatively, I can ask Shawn to pick patch 2 if you only intend to take patch 1. > > > >I think that would break build or need to wait for another cycle. > >I can ack if it can be routed via i.MX tree or need ACK to pick it up myself. > > Shawn, > > Do you plan to pick the two patches with Sudeep's Ack in patch 1? Or > you prefer to route the patches via SCMI tree with your Ack? I noticed this morning we are already at -rc5, which is later than my usual PR timing (I generally aim to send to the SoC team between -rc4 and -rc5). I have already sent the SCMI PR. For these changes, would it be acceptable to route them via the i.MX tree if they are still intended for v7.0/v6.20? If not, I am happy to defer and pick them up for the merge window after next. -- Regards, Sudeep
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 11:59:07AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 09:34:47AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 03:46:29PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > >On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 08:49:24PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > > >> Hi Sudeep, > > >> > > >> Hope you're doing well. Apologies for following up again, but this v3 patchset > > >> has been pending for quite some time. I wanted to check if everything looks > > >> good on your end. > > >> > > > > > >Yes overall it looks good to me. > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > > > > ... > > >> Alternatively, I can ask Shawn to pick patch 2 if you only intend to take patch 1. > > > > > >I think that would break build or need to wait for another cycle. > > >I can ack if it can be routed via i.MX tree or need ACK to pick it up myself. > > > > Shawn, > > > > Do you plan to pick the two patches with Sudeep's Ack in patch 1? Or > > you prefer to route the patches via SCMI tree with your Ack? > > I noticed this morning we are already at -rc5, which is later than my usual PR > timing (I generally aim to send to the SoC team between -rc4 and -rc5). I have > already sent the SCMI PR. > > For these changes, would it be acceptable to route them via the i.MX tree if > they are still intended for v7.0/v6.20? If not, I am happy to defer and pick > them up for the merge window after next. I picked them up for v7.0/v6.20, thanks! Shawn
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.