linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ChromeOS Embedded Controller charge control driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 22:59:52 +0200
From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
To: Dustin Howett <dustin@...ett.net>
Cc: Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, 
	Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, 
	chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>, Stephen Horvath <s.horvath@...look.com.au>, 
	Rajas Paranjpe <paranjperajas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ChromeOS Embedded Controller charge control driver

On 2024-06-02 18:40:18+0000, Dustin Howett wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 3:05 PM Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net> wrote:
> >
> > Add a power supply driver that supports charge thresholds and behaviour
> > configuration.
> >
> > This is a complete rework of
> > "platform/chrome: cros_ec_framework_laptop: new driver" [0], which used
> > Framework specific EC commands.
> >
> > The driver propsed in this series only uses upstream CrOS functionality.
> >
> > Tested on a Framework 13 AMD, Firmware 3.05.
> >
> 
> I've tested this out on the Framework Laptop 13, 11th gen intel core
> and AMD Ryzen 7040 editions.

Thanks!

> The problem is that the AMD framework laptop *reports* support for the
> CrOS charge controller, but it does not truly support it.
> As with the 11th Gen Intel Core (and by proxy the 12th, 13th) it still
> does require the OEM-specific command.

This is surpising, it works on my machine, which is also a AMD 7040.

> This is evinced by a mismatch between the firmware-configured value
> and the value reported by the charge control subsystem through this
> driver.
> 
> $ cat /sys/class/power_supply/BAT1/charge_control_end_threshold
> 100
> 
> $ ectool raw 0x3E03 b8 # OEM command 0x3E03 with BIT(3) in the payload
> is Framework's charge limit query host command
> Read 2 bytes
>  50 00                                           |P.              |
> (in my case, 80 in decimal)
> 
> The charge limit is managed at [1], and it does not appear to
> integrate with the standard charge control machinery.
> 
> I'll pursue getting this board not to report support for CrOS charge
> control. This driver is still entirely fit for purpose, just not for
> this board.

Can you try disabling all of the Framework-specific charge control
settings and test again?
Probably the different, disparate logics in the Framework ECs are
conflicting with each other.

Thomas