Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns #24449

degjorva · 2025-09-09T14:27:58Z

See commits
test_crypto: PR-860

NordicBuilder · 2025-09-09T14:28:45Z

The following west manifest projects have changed revision in this Pull Request:

Name	Old Revision	New Revision	Diff
trusted-firmware-m	nrfconnect/sdk-trusted-firmware-m@`f9a27d0`	nrfconnect/sdk-trusted-firmware-m@`dd98f7b` (`main`)	nrfconnect/[email protected]
zephyr	nrfconnect/sdk-zephyr@`9804956`	nrfconnect/sdk-zephyr@`be5d777` (`main`)	nrfconnect/[email protected]

✅ All manifest checks OK

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the Manifest GitHub Action.

NordicBuilder · 2025-09-09T14:38:44Z

CI Information

^{To view the history of this post, click the 'edited' button above}
Build number: 70

Inputs:

Sources:

trusted-firmware-m: PR head: dd98f7be60001a4f27e99a5aacba76eab5c5b6b9
sdk-nrf: PR head: cafd67a890f20aeead2d3b3edd296dd879f4035a
zephyr: PR head: be5d7776dbb783b400dd92c6575c8f15f630b483

more details

trusted-firmware-m:

PR head: dd98f7be60001a4f27e99a5aacba76eab5c5b6b9
merge base: f9a27d019efe988d831bda76a385751807cf7c87
Diff

sdk-nrf:

PR head: cafd67a890f20aeead2d3b3edd296dd879f4035a
merge base: 36f509fcb08236a5a8099644abb6a3d6fc283717
target head (main): 2e7e3f4fc9a3d89bf4813b1d393e885f724d61c3
Diff

zephyr:

PR head: be5d7776dbb783b400dd92c6575c8f15f630b483
merge base: 980495663735d03d791ff659e254dcc6a299dee0
Diff

Github labels

Enabled	Name	Description
	ci-disabled	Disable the ci execution
	ci-all-test	Run all of ci, no test spec filtering will be done
	ci-force-downstream	Force execution of downstream even if twister fails
	ci-run-twister	Force run twister
	ci-run-zephyr-twister	Force run zephyr twister

List of changed files detected by CI (95)

cmake
│  ├── sysbuild
│  │  │ partition_manager.cmake
doc
│  ├── nrf
│  │  ├── includes
│  │  │  │ sample_board_rows.txt
│  │  ├── releases_and_maturity
│  │  │  ├── releases
│  │  │  │  │ release-notes-changelog.rst
modules
│  ├── tee
│  │  ├── tf-m
│  │  │  ├── trusted-firmware-m
│  │  │  │  ├── platform
│  │  │  │  │  ├── ext
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── target
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── nordic_nrf
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── common
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── core
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── config_nordic_nrf_spe.cmake.in
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── ns
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54l.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54l_common.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54l_common.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54lm.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54lv.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── startup_nrf54lx.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ target_cfg_54l.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── cpuarch.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── ns
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── partition
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── flash_layout.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ region_defs.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── tests
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ psa_arch_tests_config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── RTE_Device.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── cpuarch.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── device_cfg.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── ns
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ cpuarch_ns.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── services
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── include
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ tfm_platform_user_memory_ranges.h
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ tfm_platform_system.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── tests
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── psa_arch_tests_config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ tfm_tests_config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  ├── tfm_hal_platform.c
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ tfm_peripherals_config.h
│  ├── trusted-firmware-m
│  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  ├── Kconfig.tfm.defconfig
│  │  ├── Kconfig.tfm.pm
│  │  ├── tfm_boards
│  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  ├── board
│  │  │  │  │ device_cfg.h
│  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a_cpuapp
│  │  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  ├── config.cmake
│  │  │  │  ├── cpuarch.cmake
│  │  │  │  ├── ns
│  │  │  │  │  │ cpuarch_ns.cmake
samples
│  ├── crypto
│  │  ├── aes_ccm
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── aes_gcm
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── chachapoly
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── ecdh
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── ecdsa
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── ecjpake
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── eddsa
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── hkdf
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── hmac
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── pbkdf2
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── persistent_key_usage
│  │  │  ├── boards
│  │  │  │  │ nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20_cpuapp_ns.conf
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── psa_tls
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── rng
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── rsa
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── sha256
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── spake2p
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  ├── tfm
│  │  ├── tfm_hello_world
│  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── tfm_secure_peripheral
│  │  │  ├── boards
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_ns.conf
│  │  │  │  │ nrf54lv10dk_nrf54lv10a_cpuapp_ns.conf
scripts
│  │ quarantine_zephyr.yaml
subsys
│  ├── bootloader
│  │  │ Kconfig
│  ├── partition_manager
│  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  ├── pm.yml.nvs
│  │  ├── pm.yml.settings
│  │  ├── pm.yml.tfm
│  │  │ pm.yml.zms
west.yml
zephyr
│  ├── boards
│  │  ├── nordic
│  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk
│  │  │  │  ├── Kconfig
│  │  │  │  ├── Kconfig.defconfig
│  │  │  │  ├── Kconfig.nrf54lm20dk
│  │  │  │  ├── board.cmake
│  │  │  │  ├── board.yml
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_common.dtsi
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp.dts
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_ns.dts
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_ns.yaml
│  │  │  │  │ nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_ns_defconfig
│  ├── dts
│  │  ├── arm
│  │  │  ├── nordic
│  │  │  │  │ nrf54lm20a_enga_cpuapp.dtsi
│  │  ├── vendor
│  │  │  ├── nordic
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a.dtsi
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a_ns_partition.dtsi
│  │  │  │  │ nrf54lm20a_partition.dtsi
│  ├── modules
│  │  ├── trusted-firmware-m
│  │  │  ├── Kconfig.tfm
│  │  │  ├── nordic
│  │  │  │  ├── nrf54lm20a_cpuapp
│  │  │  │  │  ├── CMakeLists.txt
│  │  │  │  │  ├── config.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  ├── cpuarch.cmake
│  │  │  │  │  ├── ns
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ cpuarch_ns.cmake
│  ├── samples
│  │  ├── drivers
│  │  │  ├── watchdog
│  │  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  ├── tfm_integration
│  │  │  ├── config_build
│  │  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  │  │  ├── tfm_ipc
│  │  │  │  │ sample.yaml
│  ├── tests
│  │  ├── drivers
│  │  │  ├── adc
│  │  │  │  ├── adc_api
│  │  │  │  │  │ testcase.yaml
│  │  │  ├── watchdog
│  │  │  │  ├── wdt_basic_api
│  │  │  │  │  │ testcase.yaml
│  │  ├── subsys
│  │  │  ├── settings
│  │  │  │  ├── its
│  │  │  │  │  │ testcase.yaml

Outputs:

Toolchain

Version: cfa6b06338
Build docker image: docker-dtr.nordicsemi.no/sw-production/ncs-build:cfa6b06338_e595b21c39

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

◻️ Toolchain - Skipped: existing toolchain is used
✅ Build twister - Skipped: Skipping Build & Test as it succeeded in a previous run: 67
✅ Integration tests
- ✅ test-sdk-audio - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ desktop52_verification - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-apps - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test_ble_nrf_config
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_mesh - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_samples - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-chip - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nfc - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_cloud - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_libmodem-nrf - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_serial_lte_modem - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_zephyr_lwm2m - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_samples - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_lwm2m - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_thingy91 - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf_crypto - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-rpc - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-rs - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-fem - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-tfm - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-thread-main - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-sdk-find-my - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf_lrcs_positioning - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-sdk-wifi - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-low-level - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-sdk-mcuboot - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-sdk-dfu - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-ps-main - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run
- ✅ test-secdom-samples-public - Skipped: Job was skipped as it succeeded in a previous run

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI

tejlmand

A lot of very long lines, both in Kconfig and CMake.

Please line wrap.

tejlmand · 2025-09-09T19:57:26Z

subsys/bootloader/Kconfig

@@ -59,10 +59,10 @@ config PM_PARTITION_SIZE_PROVISION
 	hex
 	default 0x280 if SOC_SERIES_NRF91X || SOC_NRF5340_CPUAPP # Stored in OTP region
 	# Monotonic counter slot takes 4 bytes on nRF54L Series
-	default 0x460 if SOC_NRF54L15_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L05_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L10_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LV10A_ENGA_CPUAPP
+	default 0x460 if SOC_NRF54L15_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L05_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L10_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LV10A_ENGA_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LM20A_ENGA_CPUAPP


please line wrap.

tejlmand · 2025-09-09T19:57:34Z

subsys/bootloader/Kconfig

 	default 0x280 if SOC_NRF5340_CPUNET # Second instance stored in internal flash of NET
 	default FPROTECT_BLOCK_SIZE
-	prompt "Flash space reserved for PROVISION" if !(SOC_NRF9160 || SOC_NRF5340_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L15_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L05_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L10_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LV10A_ENGA_CPUAPP)
+	prompt "Flash space reserved for PROVISION" if !(SOC_NRF9160 || SOC_NRF5340_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L15_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L05_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54L10_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LV10A_ENGA_CPUAPP || SOC_NRF54LM20A_ENGA_CPUAPP)


please line wrap.

doc/nrf/releases_and_maturity/releases/release-notes-changelog.rst

greg-fer · 2025-09-10T07:40:47Z

doc/nrf/includes/sample_board_rows.txt

@@ -275,6 +275,10 @@

 | :ref:`nRF54LM20 DK <ug_nrf54l>` | PCA10184 | :zephyr:board:`nrf54lm20dk <nrf54lm20dk>` | ``nrf54lm20dk/nrf54lm20a/cpuapp`` |

+.. nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20a_cpuapp_ns
+
+| nRF54LM20 DK |   | nrf54lm20dk | ``nrf54lm20dk/nrf54lm20a/cpuapp/ns`` |


greg-fer · 2025-09-10T07:41:38Z

samples/crypto/persistent_key_usage/boards/nrf54lm20dk_nrf54lm20_cpuapp_ns.conf

+# LM20 does not support multipart AES operations so can't use
+# encrypted ITS until a workaround is implemented


Suggested change

# LM20 does not support multipart AES operations so can't use

# encrypted ITS until a workaround is implemented

# LM20 does not support multipart AES operations so it cannot use

# encrypted ITS until a workaround is implemented

doc/nrf/includes/sample_board_rows.txt

doc/nrf/releases_and_maturity/releases/release-notes-changelog.rst

greg-fer

Apologize for adding yet another request for edits.
Please also update:

https://docs.nordicsemi.com/bundle/ncs-latest/page/nrf/releases_and_maturity/software_maturity.html#trusted_firmware-m_support and change -- entries for LM20 to either Experimental or Supported.

https://github.com/nrfconnect/sdk-nrf/blob/main/doc/nrf/app_dev/board_names.rst?plain=1#L105 with the following entry before the flpr line:

|                   |            |                                                     | ``nrf54lm20dk/nrf54lm20a/cpuapp/ns`` (:ref:`TF-M <app_boards_spe_nspe>`) |

Vge0rge · 2025-10-24T12:01:34Z

@tejlmand Compliance failures are unrelated to my PR and will not be fixed. And the current failures in CI are waiting for quarantine to be updated as it is also unrelated to my PR.

If you don't want this PR to ever be merged, that's the correct methodology to go about it. Also whilst fixing the compliance error, please be sure to read and acquaint yourself with https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/contribute/style/kconfig.html then fix any issues in this PR that do not abide by those

There are issues with this methodology though, there are multiple compliance failures in this PR which are triggered by lines which are not affected by this PR. The reason is that with the new approach the whole file are being checked if you touch a single line of a file. That does not scale very well for big PRs like this though. You are getting penalized because you are the first person to touch the file. I am not sure who is responsible of fixing unrelated change with this new approach, do you know anything regarding this @nordicjm ?

It's by design, the zephyr rules on it come from the zephyr ruff (python) rules of if you make changes to the file, you fix the file

It seems that we are getting penalized for touching many files by design then, thats very unfortunate. I guess big PRs makes sense to be delayed as much as possible then to avoid extra unnecessary overhead.

nordicjm · 2025-10-24T12:27:54Z

@tejlmand Compliance failures are unrelated to my PR and will not be fixed. And the current failures in CI are waiting for quarantine to be updated as it is also unrelated to my PR.

If you don't want this PR to ever be merged, that's the correct methodology to go about it. Also whilst fixing the compliance error, please be sure to read and acquaint yourself with https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/contribute/style/kconfig.html then fix any issues in this PR that do not abide by those

There are issues with this methodology though, there are multiple compliance failures in this PR which are triggered by lines which are not affected by this PR. The reason is that with the new approach the whole file are being checked if you touch a single line of a file. That does not scale very well for big PRs like this though. You are getting penalized because you are the first person to touch the file. I am not sure who is responsible of fixing unrelated change with this new approach, do you know anything regarding this @nordicjm ?

It's by design, the zephyr rules on it come from the zephyr ruff (python) rules of if you make changes to the file, you fix the file

It seems that we are getting penalized for touching many files by design then, thats very unfortunate. I guess big PRs makes sense to be delayed as much as possible then to avoid extra unnecessary overhead.

The error listed is incredible simple, it takes seconds to fix it with a find and replace, literally seconds, then CI is happy and you can stop arguing with a script (because that is actually what you are doing).
Instead, reviews have been left, comments have been left by people: Torsten's time has been wasted, my time has been wasted, your time has been wasted, the author's time has been wasted, so instead of spending what literally is seconds, the time of 4 engineers has been wasted. This has happened 3 times this week alone? So please, I'm asking really nicely, really nicely, fix the issue, stop arguing with a bot, and watch as compliance passes, you get approvals, and PRs magically get merged in much faster timeframes - suddenly everyone is happy

degjorva · 2025-10-27T10:51:03Z

@richabp Please take another look

Vge0rge · 2025-10-27T10:54:11Z

@tejlmand Compliance failures are unrelated to my PR and will not be fixed. And the current failures in CI are waiting for quarantine to be updated as it is also unrelated to my PR.

If you don't want this PR to ever be merged, that's the correct methodology to go about it. Also whilst fixing the compliance error, please be sure to read and acquaint yourself with https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/contribute/style/kconfig.html then fix any issues in this PR that do not abide by those

There are issues with this methodology though, there are multiple compliance failures in this PR which are triggered by lines which are not affected by this PR. The reason is that with the new approach the whole file are being checked if you touch a single line of a file. That does not scale very well for big PRs like this though. You are getting penalized because you are the first person to touch the file. I am not sure who is responsible of fixing unrelated change with this new approach, do you know anything regarding this @nordicjm ?

It's by design, the zephyr rules on it come from the zephyr ruff (python) rules of if you make changes to the file, you fix the file

It seems that we are getting penalized for touching many files by design then, thats very unfortunate. I guess big PRs makes sense to be delayed as much as possible then to avoid extra unnecessary overhead.

The error listed is incredible simple, it takes seconds to fix it with a find and replace, literally seconds, then CI is happy and you can stop arguing with a script (because that is actually what you are doing). Instead, reviews have been left, comments have been left by people: Torsten's time has been wasted, my time has been wasted, your time has been wasted, the author's time has been wasted, so instead of spending what literally is seconds, the time of 4 engineers has been wasted. This has happened 3 times this week alone? So please, I'm asking really nicely, really nicely, fix the issue, stop arguing with a bot, and watch as compliance passes, you get approvals, and PRs magically get merged in much faster timeframes - suddenly everyone is happy

Hold your horses Jamie. You are expressing your frustration to me even though I actually have very little to do with all this apart from leaving a frustrating comment here. Anyway, Dag Erik fixed it already so its all good but I could not just ignore your comment.

tejlmand · 2025-10-28T07:45:36Z

It seems that we are getting penalized for touching many files by design then, thats very unfortunate. I guess big PRs makes sense to be delayed as much as possible then to avoid extra unnecessary overhead.

@Vge0rge What happened to the good old practice of leaving the code in a better shape when anyway touching the file ?
Or walking the extra mile, so that our code-base would slowly improve instead of becoming a bigger mess ?

degjorva · 2025-10-28T08:19:56Z

@richabp Ping

Vge0rge · 2025-10-28T09:21:17Z

It seems that we are getting penalized for touching many files by design then, thats very unfortunate. I guess big PRs makes sense to be delayed as much as possible then to avoid extra unnecessary overhead.

@Vge0rge What happened to the good old practice of leaving the code in a better shape when anyway touching the file ? Or walking the extra mile, so that our code-base would slowly improve instead of becoming a bigger mess ?

@tejlmand No-one said that slowly improving the code is a bad idea. What I tried to expressed here is that a change like this does penalize big PRs though, which is an undeniable truth. To mitigate that a more clear process need to be established before enforcing such changes globally. Then no-one has frustration, and tensions don't need to be handled in public forums.

Anyway, this took more attention and time than needed for sure.

tejlmand · 2025-10-28T14:19:29Z

@tejlmand No-one said that slowly improving the code is a bad idea.

to me, having to waste time on those discussions, regarding changes that takes less than a minute to fix, is an indication that people don't care for improving the code.

to mitigate that you a more clear process need to be established before enforcing such changes globally.

Those rules comes from upstream, and there is a clear process upstream, and if rules or checks are proposed and the community doesn't agree, then discussions can be brought up at the architecture WG or even TSC.

So feel free to join all the discussion upstream regarding such rules being introduced.

Update, an extra FYI, we inherit compliance check from upstream.

Update configurations to support /ns targets for LM20 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns tfm_hello_world and tfm_secure_peripheral. Also update incorrect pin masks on 54L devices. Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns to all samples that support lm20 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

This test is not supported for CRACEN devices. NCSDK-34723 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

degjorva requested review from a team, nordicjm and tejlmand as code owners September 9, 2025 14:27

NordicBuilder added manifest changelog-entry-required Update changelog before merge. Remove label if entry is not needed or already added. labels Sep 9, 2025

NordicBuilder added manifest-zephyr manifest-trusted-firmware-m DNM labels Sep 9, 2025

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch from a32cc5b to 47f8bab Compare September 9, 2025 14:50

degjorva requested review from a team as code owners September 9, 2025 14:50

NordicBuilder added doc-required PR must not be merged without tech writer approval. and removed changelog-entry-required Update changelog before merge. Remove label if entry is not needed or already added. labels Sep 9, 2025

degjorva requested a review from greg-fer September 9, 2025 14:50

tejlmand requested changes Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

peknis requested changes Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

doc/nrf/releases_and_maturity/releases/release-notes-changelog.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

greg-fer requested changes Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch 2 times, most recently from cd365af to e1edff1 Compare September 10, 2025 12:06

divipillai reviewed Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

doc/nrf/includes/sample_board_rows.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

doc/nrf/releases_and_maturity/releases/release-notes-changelog.rst Show resolved Hide resolved

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch 3 times, most recently from 3151467 to d397801 Compare September 11, 2025 08:12

greg-fer requested changes Sep 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch from 9b59978 to 6b3deaa Compare October 24, 2025 12:45

degjorva requested a review from richabp October 27, 2025 10:50

richabp approved these changes Oct 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch from 6b3deaa to e5620b1 Compare October 28, 2025 11:37

NordicBuilder requested a review from a team October 28, 2025 11:38

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch from e5620b1 to 1f2e647 Compare October 28, 2025 13:08

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch 2 times, most recently from 6c40f89 to 1015433 Compare October 29, 2025 08:16

nordicjm approved these changes Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

tejlmand approved these changes Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

degjorva mentioned this pull request Oct 29, 2025

manifest: sdk-zephyr: [nrf fromlist] boards: nordic: Add initial support for nRF54LM20A/ns #24448

Closed

degjorva added 4 commits October 29, 2025 13:34

modules: trusted-firmware-m: Add support for TF-m to nRF54LM20a

160b8e5

Update configurations to support /ns targets for LM20 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

samples: tfm: add support for nRF54LM20A/ns to tfm samples

d220bc1

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns tfm_hello_world and tfm_secure_peripheral. Also update incorrect pin masks on 54L devices. Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

samples: crypto: add support for nRF54LM20A/ns to samples

309ee2a

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns to all samples that support lm20 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

scripts: quarantine_zephyr: Disable unsupported kernel test

cafd67a

This test is not supported for CRACEN devices. NCSDK-34723 Signed-off-by: Dag Erik Gjørvad <[email protected]>

degjorva force-pushed the lm20-tfm-final branch from 1015433 to cafd67a Compare October 29, 2025 12:34

NordicBuilder requested review from a team, nordicjm and tejlmand October 29, 2025 12:35

NordicBuilder removed the DNM label Oct 29, 2025

nordicjm merged commit af517d5 into nrfconnect:main Oct 30, 2025
25 of 26 checks passed

	\| nRF54LM20 DK \| \| nrf54lm20dk \| ``nrf54lm20dk/nrf54lm20a/cpuapp/ns`` \|
	\| nRF54LM20 DK \| PCA10184 \| nrf54lm20dk \| ``nrf54lm20dk/nrf54lm20a/cpuapp/ns`` \|

		# LM20 does not support multipart AES operations so can't use
		# encrypted ITS until a workaround is implemented

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns #24449

Add support for nRF54LM20A/ns #24449

Uh oh!

Conversation

degjorva commented Sep 9, 2025 • edited by PFnord Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NordicBuilder commented Sep 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NordicBuilder commented Sep 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CI Information

Inputs:

Sources:

Github labels

Outputs:

Toolchain

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

Uh oh!

tejlmand left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tejlmand Sep 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tejlmand Sep 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

greg-fer Sep 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

greg-fer Sep 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

greg-fer left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Vge0rge commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

nordicjm commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

degjorva commented Oct 27, 2025

Uh oh!

Vge0rge commented Oct 27, 2025

Uh oh!

tejlmand commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

degjorva commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Vge0rge commented Oct 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tejlmand commented Oct 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

13 participants

degjorva commented Sep 9, 2025 •

edited by PFnord

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Sep 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

NordicBuilder commented Sep 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

greg-fer left a comment •

edited

Loading

Vge0rge commented Oct 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tejlmand commented Oct 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading