On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 9:21 PM Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 1/7/2025 07:14, Hridesh MG wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 7:49 AM Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Kurt, > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 5, 2025, at 11:45 PM, Kurt Borja wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> Some drivers may need to dynamically modify their selected `choices`. > >>> Such is the case of the acer-wmi driver, which implemented their own > >>> profile cycling method, because users expect different profiles to be > >>> available whether the laptop is on AC or not [1]. > >>> > >>> These series would allow acer-wmi to simplify this custom cycling method > >>> to use platform_profile_cycle(), as it's already being proposed in these > >>> series [2]; without changing expected behaviors, by refreshing their > >>> selected choices on AC connect/disconnect events, which would also solve > >>> this discussion [3]. > >>> > >>> Additionally, I think the platform_profile_ops approach would enable us > >>> to hide the platform_profile_handler in the future, and instead just pass > >>> the class device to get/set methods like the HWMON subsystem does. > >>> > >>> I think having this kind of flexibility is valuable. Let me know what you > >>> think! > >>> > >> > >> I personally would love to see how this would be used for the acer issue highlighted to see how it would work out. It feels like the series is short a patch :) > > > > I do think that having this flexibility would be good, as i was > > considering manually clearing the set bits and calling platform_notify > > for the acer series, but in my specific case (for devices using the > > predator v4 interface) it was found that the hardware was responsive > > to all profiles regardless of AC/battery mode so it made sense to > > leave this kind of artificial limiting of profiles to the > > userspace--similar to how the Windows driver handles it through the > > Nitro Sense app. > > > > I feel like users should have the power to utilize their hardware in > > the way they want it to, though if there is a compelling reason to > > limit the profiles then i'd be more than happy to add this to the > > series :) > > > > > > -- > > Hridesh MG > > I agree with Mark, this series is missing the patch that shows exactly > how this would be used. Furthermore; what exactly are the differences > in choices between AC or DC? On the predator series, the Windows OEM application only allows you to select the low-power and balanced platform profiles on DC. These profiles can however still be activated through WMI methods and the hardware will apply them. > To "userspace" I fail to understand how "balanced" is different from AC > to DC for example. It is not, the profiles or states themselves are not modified between AC and DC, just the switching between them is affected. -- Thanks, Hridesh MG
