Re: [PATCH 1/3] thinkpad_acpi: add support for force_discharge

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Hans,

On 27.09.21 17:12, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi Nicolò,

On 9/27/21 5:00 PM, Nicolò Piazzalunga wrote:
Hi,

On 9/27/21 3:59 PM, Mark Pearson wrote:
Do let me know if there are some important use cases for these so I can go back to the FW team and discuss supporting them properly.

The important use cases are force discharge and inhibit charge.
These at present are dealt with using tpacpi-bat, which relies on (out of tree) acpi_call.
See also your previous reply.

I can see how those can be useful in certain circumstances.

I can also understand how Lenovo does not want these to be
available by default everywhere.

I think a good compromise would be to add a bool module option
which defaults to false to enable these.

From the user perspective, I don't agree that this is a good
compromise. Users simply want to recalibrate their battery. Having to
set the module option beforehand is an unnecessary hurdle imho.

Of course a module option again leads to support overhead in "user
space". Then tlp-stat -b would have to inform the user that
force_discharge is unfortunately not available, but he should try to set
the module option. What would that be good for?

While I respect Mark's official opinion, I would like to counter with my
experience from 10 years of TLP development and support:

The calls for force_discharge work unmodified since the 2012 ThinkPads
(T420/X220) on all models that also support charge thresholds.

They also work reliably, otherwise the issue tracker at tpacpi-bat and
TLP would be full of user issues.

inhibit_charge is probably used rather rarely, at least no TLP user has
asked for it.

@Mark: what is Lenovo's position on the calls for charge thresholds
already included in thinkpad_acpi? Are they also internal?


Assuming Mark is ok with that, this is still blocked on agreeing
on standard power_supply class property names for these 2 features.

Can you perhaps write a (RFC) patch adding proposed standardized
attributes for this to:

Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-power

As well as to the enum power_supply_property {}
enum in: include/linux/power_supply.h

And to the power_supply_attrs[] array in
drivers/power/supply/power_supply_sysfs.c

?

And then send that the Sebastian Reichel with the linux-pm
and platform-driver-x86 lists in the Cc?

Regards,

Hans


--

Freundliche Grüße / Kind regards,

Thomas Koch



Mail : linrunner@xxxxxxx

Web  : https://linrunner.de/tlp




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux