linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] platform/x86: asus-wmi: add support for vivobook fan profiles

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c2ab501b-532a-41a6-a142-55b52e135aee@doubly.so>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 13:30:53 +0200
From: Devin Bayer <dev@...bly.so>
To: Luke Jones <luke@...nes.dev>, Mohamed Ghanmi <mohamed.ghanmi@...com.tn>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, corentin.chary@...il.com,
 platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] platform/x86: asus-wmi: add support for vivobook
 fan profiles



On 21/06/2024 12.26, Luke Jones wrote:
> 
>> I tested it and it works. However, it has a couple issues:
>>
>> 1. This dev_id isn't Vivobook specific. My Zenbook UX3404VC (2023) has this control.
> 
> I'm not sure what else to call it. "thermal_throttle_alt" or otherwise, I don't know. The intention should be clear even if only in a comment.

Okay, I thought Vivo might be little confusing and the "2" suffix would
match the ASUS_WMI_DEVID_MINI_LED_MODE2 convention.

>> 2. The Zenbook only supports values 0-2 (standard, quiet and performance).
>>    Calling the method with 3 causes the KEYBOARD_KEY event to fire instead of
>>    adjusting the GPU power and fan speed.
> 
> I linked you to v4 of this patch in one of my responses. The link again is https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20240609144849.2532-1-mohamed.ghanmi@supcom.tn/T/#mcd18e74676084e21d5c15af84bc08d8c6b375fb9

Ah, sorry. I see v4 of the patch is working fine.

>> I wonder if the existing fan_boost_mode should also be considered a platform_profile?
> 
> No. It tends to be only fans, and usually fullspeed. Platform_profile is intended to control platform related variables. I would also be curious if you tested without the PPD (daemon) as recent versions may also control the energy performance preference and that will skew your results.

I don't use the PPD so tested without it.

BTW, FAN_BOOST_MODE doesn't have a FULLSPEED constant, so maybe you were
thinking of FAN_CTRL.

I don't have a 0x00110018 device so I can't test that but just FYI, the
reason I thought the 0x00110019 device as related are the similar
dev_ids and it calls the ACPI method name FANL to write the EC variable
QFAN.

~ Dev