linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Add support to detect hardware damage detection capability.

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: <ac48f060-b1c1-45cb-ba3b-ed6fc838b2f2@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2025 21:04:11 +0900
From: Nitin <nitjoshi@...il.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>, Mark Pearson
 <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>, Ilpo Järvinen
 <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
 <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Nitin Joshi1 <njoshi1@...ovo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Add support to detect
 hardware damage detection capability.

Hi,

On 12/8/25 18:32, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8-Dec-25 8:19 AM, Nitin wrote:
>> On 12/3/25 22:16, Mark Pearson wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2025, at 5:18 AM, Nitin wrote:
>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for reviewing this patch.
>>>>
>>>> On 12/3/25 16:52, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting new feature. A few small remarks on the proposed
>>>>> sysfs API below.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3-Dec-25 4:40 AM, Nitin Joshi wrote:
>>>>>> Thinkpads are adding the ability to detect and report hardware damage
>>>>>> status. Add new sysfs interface to identify the impacted component
>>>>>> with status.
>>>>>> Initial support is available for the USB-C replaceable connector.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nitin Joshi<nitjoshi@...il.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     .../admin-guide/laptops/thinkpad-acpi.rst     |  26 +++
>>>>>>     drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c   | 179 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>     2 files changed, 205 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/laptops/thinkpad-acpi.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/laptops/thinkpad-acpi.rst
>>>>>> index 4ab0fef7d440..4a3220529489 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/laptops/thinkpad-acpi.rst
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/laptops/thinkpad-acpi.rst
>>>>>> @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ detailed description):
>>>>>>         - Setting keyboard language
>>>>>>         - WWAN Antenna type
>>>>>>         - Auxmac
>>>>>> +    - Hardware damage detection capability
>>>>>>        A compatibility table by model and feature is maintained on the web
>>>>>>     site, http://ibm-acpi.sf.net/. I appreciate any success or failure
>>>>>> @@ -1576,6 +1577,31 @@ percentage level, above which charging will stop.
>>>>>>     The exact semantics of the attributes may be found in
>>>>>>     Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-power.
>>>>>>     +Hardware damage detection capability
>>>>>> +-----------------
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +sysfs attributes: hwdd_status
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Thinkpads are adding the ability to detect and report hardware damage.
>>>>>> +Add new sysfs interface to identify the impacted component.
>>>>>> +Initial support is available for the USB-C replaceable connector.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +The available commands are::
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +        cat /sys/devices/platform/thinkpad_acpi/hwdd_status
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +This value displays device type and location of device with damage status.
>>>>>> +For example:
>>>>>> +if no damage is detected:
>>>>>> +  No damage detected
>>>>>> +if damage detected:
>>>>>> +  Damage detected:
>>>>>> +  Device: TYPE-C
>>>>>> +  Location: Base, Right side, Center port
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +The property is read-only. If feature is not supported then sysfs
>>>>>> +class is not created.
>>>>> Nitpick: s/class/attribute/ classes are standardized sysfs
>>>>> interfaces living under /sys/class/ which this is not.
>>>> Ack, I will modify it.
>>>>> Besides the nitpick I'm wondering if we do not want to make
>>>>> this a little bit more friendly / easy for software to parse ?
>>>>>
>>>>> ATM this seems focused on a human directly reading
>>>>> the output but what if we want some sort of automation,
>>>>> like e.g. a Linux version of the Lenovo Vantage sw parsing
>>>>> this in the future?
>>>>>
>>>>> Note I've no specific suggestions for how to make this
>>>>> easier to parse, this is just an observation.
>>>> Thank you for pointing this out.  I am open for suggestions and will
>>>> re-check regarding its use case in lenovo vantage in future.
>>>>
>>> I'd not considered it from this perspective.
>>>
>>> One concern is that it could be multiple devices in multiple location - so breaking it up into too many pieces becomes difficult.
>>>
>>> What if we did:
>>>     hwdd_status - 1 or 0 if damage detected
>>>     hwdd_detail - list of damaged items with their location (could be multiple). e.g.
>>>       TYPE-C: Base, Right side, Center port
> So I assume this would then output one line per damaged "item", it would
> be good to document this (1 line per damaged item) in the sysfs ABI docs.

yes, we will have one line per damaged "item".  I will update ABI docs 
accordingly.

Thanks

>
>>> If hwdd_status is 0 then hwdd_detail would display "No damage detected"
>> Thank you, Mark ! I am OK with this suggestion.
>>
>> Hans / Ilpo - Any comment on this ? Thanks
> Yes this sounds good to me.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans

Thanks & Regards,

Nitin

>
>