Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] power: reset: pscrr: add watchdog pretimeout reason tracking
From: Oleksij Rempel
Date: Fri Jul 31 2026 - 01:28:15 EST
On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 08:02:35AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 7/29/26 22:24, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > Hi Matti,
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 07:49:41AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > On 22/07/2026 18:13, Faruque Ansari wrote:
> > > > Watchdog pretimeout resets are not recorded with a dedicated reset
> > > > reason, causing subsequent boots to report PSCR_UNKNOWN and making it
> > > > difficult to distinguish them from other unexpected resets.
> > > >
> > > > Add PSCR_WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT as a dedicated reset reason code and
> > > > prevent the panic notifier from overwriting a watchdog pretimeout
> > > > reason with PSCR_KERNEL_PANIC when the pretimeout governor triggers a
> > > > panic.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Faruque Ansari <faruque.ansari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/power/reset/pscrr.c | 7 ++++++-
> > > > include/linux/power/power_on_reason.h | 1 +
> > > > include/linux/reboot.h | 1 +
> > > > kernel/reboot.c | 1 +
> > > > 4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/power/reset/pscrr.c b/drivers/power/reset/pscrr.c
> > > > index b5906f127e88..5b107c62fe82 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/power/reset/pscrr.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/power/reset/pscrr.c
> > > > @@ -149,7 +149,12 @@ static int pscrr_panic_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > > > if (!backend || !backend->ops || !backend->ops->write_reason)
> > > > return NOTIFY_OK;
> > > > - set_psc_reason(PSCR_KERNEL_PANIC);
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Do not overwrite a previously recorded watchdog pretimeout reason
> > > > + * during panic handling.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (get_psc_reason() != PSCR_WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT)
> > > > + set_psc_reason(PSCR_KERNEL_PANIC);
> > >
> > > Hi Faruque,
> > >
> > > I like the idea of adding WDG pretimeout resets in pscrr. I am just
> > > wondering what makes WDG reason so special, that it shouldn't be overwritten
> > > while other reasons can be? Can this notifier be called (now or in the
> > > future) so, that there are other reasons getting overwritten? For some
> > > reason I think the PSCRR was designed to be able to store multiple
> > > reasons(?)
> >
> > It depends on the backed. A simple nvmem cell, would be able to hold
> > only one reason.
> >
>
> That makes me wonder: Shouldn't the priority be a back-end decision, not a
> front-end decision ?
Backend provides capabilities, most nvmem cells will be able to store
only one record. Which record matters (first or last) is a
use/investigation case specific policy.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |