On 2025-03-17 16:53:49+0100, Antheas Kapenekakis wrote:
> With the X1 (AMD), OneXPlayer added a charge limit and charge inhibit
> feature to their devices. Charge limit allows for choosing an arbitrary
> battery charge setpoint in percentages. Charge ihibit allows to instruct
inhibit
> the device to stop charging either when it is awake or always.
>
> This feature was then extended for the F1Pro as well. OneXPlayer also
> released BIOS updates for the X1 Mini, X1 (Intel), and F1 devices that
> add support for this feature. Therefore, enable it for all F1 and
> X1 devices.
What happens for devices without the BIOS update?
Can the availability be detected during probe and handled properly?
> Signed-off-by: Antheas Kapenekakis <lkml@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
> drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c | 164 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 161 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig b/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> index 82cfc76bc5c9f..f4d993658c01f 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -1189,6 +1189,7 @@ config SEL3350_PLATFORM
> config OXP_EC
> tristate "OneXPlayer EC platform control"
> depends on ACPI_EC
> + depends on ACPI_BATTERY
> depends on HWMON
> depends on X86
> help
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c b/drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c
> index 39a29295f9cfe..88d839c2a4834 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/processor.h>
> +#include <acpi/battery.h>
>
> /* Handle ACPI lock mechanism */
> static u32 oxp_mutex;
> @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ enum oxp_board {
> };
>
> static enum oxp_board board;
> +static struct device *oxp_dev;
Using a global variable is ugly.
An explicit parameter passed through
battery_hook_register() -> add_battery()
would be nicer.
It would require changes to the core code and all its users, though.
>
> /* Fan reading and PWM */
> #define OXP_SENSOR_FAN_REG 0x76 /* Fan reading is 2 registers long */
> @@ -93,6 +95,23 @@ static enum oxp_board board;
> #define OXP_X1_TURBO_LED_OFF 0x01
> #define OXP_X1_TURBO_LED_ON 0x02
>
> +/* Battery extension settings */
> +#define EC_CHARGE_CONTROL_BEHAVIOURS_X1 (BIT(POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_AUTO) | \
> + BIT(POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE) | \
> + BIT(POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE_AWAKE))
> +
> +#define OXP_X1_CHARGE_LIMIT_REG 0xA3 /* X1 charge limit (%) */
> +#define OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_REG 0xA4 /* X1 bypass charging */
> +
> +#define OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_AWAKE 0x01
> +/*
> + * X1 Mask is 0x0A, OneXFly F1Pro is just 0x02
> + * but the extra bit on the X1 does nothing.
> + */
> +#define OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_OFF 0x02
> +#define OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_ALWAYS (OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_AWAKE | \
> + OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_OFF)
> +
> static const struct dmi_system_id dmi_table[] = {
> {
> .matches = {
> @@ -507,6 +526,136 @@ static ssize_t tt_led_show(struct device *dev,
>
> static DEVICE_ATTR_RW(tt_led);
>
> +/* Callbacks for charge behaviour attributes */
> +static bool oxp_psy_ext_supported(void)
> +{
> + switch (board) {
> + case oxp_x1:
> + case oxp_fly:
> + return 1;
> + default:
> + break;
> + }
> + return 0;
For 'bool' use 'true' and 'false.
> +}
> +
> +static int oxp_psy_ext_get_prop(struct power_supply *psy,
> + const struct power_supply_ext *ext,
> + void *data,
> + enum power_supply_property psp,
> + union power_supply_propval *val)
> +{
> + long raw_val;
> + int ret;
> +
> + switch (psp) {
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_CONTROL_END_THRESHOLD:
> + ret = read_from_ec(OXP_X1_CHARGE_LIMIT_REG, 1, &raw_val);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + if (raw_val > 100)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + val->intval = raw_val;
> + return 0;
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR:
> + ret = read_from_ec(OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_REG, 1, &raw_val);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + if ((raw_val & OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_ALWAYS) ==
> + OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_ALWAYS)
> + val->intval = POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE;
> + else if ((raw_val & OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_AWAKE) ==
> + OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_AWAKE)
> + val->intval = POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE_AWAKE;
> + else
> + val->intval = POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_AUTO;
> + return 0;
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static int oxp_psy_ext_set_prop(struct power_supply *psy,
> + const struct power_supply_ext *ext,
> + void *data,
> + enum power_supply_property psp,
> + const union power_supply_propval *val)
> +{
> + long raw_val;
> +
> + switch (psp) {
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_CONTROL_END_THRESHOLD:
> + if (val->intval > 100)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return write_to_ec(OXP_X1_CHARGE_LIMIT_REG, val->intval);
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR:
> + switch (val->intval) {
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_AUTO:
> + raw_val = 0;
> + break;
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE_AWAKE:
> + raw_val = OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_AWAKE;
> + break;
> + case POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE:
> + raw_val = OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_MASK_ALWAYS;
> + break;
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return write_to_ec(OXP_X1_CHARGE_INHIBIT_REG, raw_val);
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static int oxp_psy_prop_is_writeable(struct power_supply *psy,
> + const struct power_supply_ext *ext,
> + void *data,
> + enum power_supply_property psp)
> +{
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +static const enum power_supply_property oxp_psy_ext_props[] = {
> + POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR,
> + POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CHARGE_CONTROL_END_THRESHOLD,
> +};
> +
> +struct power_supply_ext oxp_psy_ext = {
static const
> + .name = "oxp-charge-control",
> + .properties = oxp_psy_ext_props,
> + .num_properties = ARRAY_SIZE(oxp_psy_ext_props),
> + .charge_behaviours = EC_CHARGE_CONTROL_BEHAVIOURS_X1,
The charge control behaviours are named "X1", but nothing else.
Seems inconsistent.
> + .get_property = oxp_psy_ext_get_prop,
> + .set_property = oxp_psy_ext_set_prop,
> + .property_is_writeable = oxp_psy_prop_is_writeable,
> +};
> +
> +static int oxp_add_battery(struct power_supply *battery, struct acpi_battery_hook *hook)
> +{
> + /* OneXPlayer devices only have one battery. */
> + if (strcmp(battery->desc->name, "BAT0") != 0 &&
> + strcmp(battery->desc->name, "BAT1") != 0 &&
> + strcmp(battery->desc->name, "BATC") != 0 &&
> + strcmp(battery->desc->name, "BATT") != 0)
> + return -ENODEV;
If they only have one battery, why is the check necessary?
> +
> + return power_supply_register_extension(battery, &oxp_psy_ext, oxp_dev, NULL);
> +}
> +
> +static int oxp_remove_battery(struct power_supply *battery, struct acpi_battery_hook *hook)
> +{
> + power_supply_unregister_extension(battery, &oxp_psy_ext);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct acpi_battery_hook battery_hook = {
> + .add_battery = oxp_add_battery,
> + .remove_battery = oxp_remove_battery,
> + .name = "OneXPlayer Battery",
This struct can also be aligned.
> +};
> +
> /* PWM enable/disable functions */
> static int oxp_pwm_enable(void)
> {
> @@ -845,12 +994,19 @@ static const struct hwmon_chip_info oxp_ec_chip_info = {
> static int oxp_platform_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> - struct device *hwdev;
> + int ret;
>
> - hwdev = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev, "oxpec", NULL,
> - &oxp_ec_chip_info, NULL);
> + oxp_dev = dev;
> + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(
> + dev, "oxp_ec", NULL, &oxp_ec_chip_info, NULL));
>
> - return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(hwdev);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (oxp_psy_ext_supported())
> + return devm_battery_hook_register(dev, &battery_hook);
If the driver is extended in the future this line will need to be touch
again as it is an unconditional early return.
This is more future-proof:
if (oxp_psy_ext_supported()) {
ret = devm_battery_hook_register(dev, &battery_hook);
if (ret)
return ret;
}
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static struct platform_driver oxp_platform_driver = {
> --
> 2.48.1
>
