Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/x86: hp-wmi: add platform profile support

[Barnabás Pőcze]

Hi


2021. február 21., vasárnap 22:30 keltezéssel, Elia Devito írta:

> Implement support for cool, balanced and performance thermal profile
>
> Signed-off-by: Elia Devito <eliadevito@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> the "quiet" profile will be implemented with a further patch
>
> v2: added platform_profile_remove() missing call
>
>  drivers/platform/x86/hp-wmi.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/hp-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/hp-wmi.c
> index 6d7b91b8109b..a33203d61cf0 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/hp-wmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/hp-wmi.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>  #include <linux/input.h>
>  #include <linux/input/sparse-keymap.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_profile.h>
>  #include <linux/acpi.h>
>  #include <linux/rfkill.h>
>  #include <linux/string.h>
> @@ -119,6 +120,12 @@ enum hp_wireless2_bits {
>  	HPWMI_POWER_FW_OR_HW	= HPWMI_POWER_BIOS | HPWMI_POWER_HARD,
>  };
>
> +enum hp_thermal_profile {
> +	HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE	= 0x00,
> +	HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_DEFAULT		= 0x01,
> +	HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_COOL			= 0x02
> +};
> +
>  #define IS_HWBLOCKED(x) ((x & HPWMI_POWER_FW_OR_HW) != HPWMI_POWER_FW_OR_HW)
>  #define IS_SWBLOCKED(x) !(x & HPWMI_POWER_SOFT)
>
> @@ -159,6 +166,8 @@ static const struct key_entry hp_wmi_keymap[] = {
>
>  static struct input_dev *hp_wmi_input_dev;
>  static struct platform_device *hp_wmi_platform_dev;
> +static struct platform_profile_handler platform_profile_handler;
> +static int platform_profile_support = 0;

I suggest you use `bool` and omit the initialization (checkpatch will warn you
about that).


>
>  static struct rfkill *wifi_rfkill;
>  static struct rfkill *bluetooth_rfkill;
> @@ -869,11 +878,80 @@ static int __init hp_wmi_rfkill2_setup(struct platform_device *device)
>  	return err;
>  }
>
> -static int thermal_profile_setup(struct platform_device *device)
> +static int thermal_profile_get(void)
>  {
> -	int err, tp;
> +	int tp;
>
>  	tp = hp_wmi_read_int(HPWMI_THERMAL_PROFILE_QUERY);
> +
> +	return tp;
> +}

Is there any reason why you didn't write

  return hp_wmi_read_int(...);

?


> +
> +static int thermal_profile_set(int thermal_profile)
> +{
> +	int err;
> +
> +	err = hp_wmi_perform_query(HPWMI_THERMAL_PROFILE_QUERY, HPWMI_WRITE, &thermal_profile,
> +							   sizeof(thermal_profile), 0);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

Here as well?


> +
> +static int platform_profile_get(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
> +				enum platform_profile_option *profile)
> +{
> +	int tp = thermal_profile_get();
> +
> +	switch (tp) {
> +	case HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE:
> +		*profile =  PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE;
> +		break;
> +	case HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_DEFAULT:
> +		*profile =  PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED;
> +		break;
> +	case HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_COOL:
> +		*profile =  PLATFORM_PROFILE_COOL;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		return -EINVAL;

I think error values (tp < 0) could possibly be propagated.


> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int platform_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
> +				enum platform_profile_option profile)
> +{
> +	int err, tp;
> +
> +	switch (profile) {
> +	case PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE:
> +		tp =  HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE;
> +		break;
> +	case PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED:
> +		tp =  HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_DEFAULT;
> +		break;
> +	case PLATFORM_PROFILE_COOL:
> +		tp =  HP_THERMAL_PROFILE_COOL;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	}
> +
> +	err = thermal_profile_set(tp);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int thermal_profile_setup(void)
> +{
> +	int err, tp;
> +
> +	tp = thermal_profile_get();
>  	if (tp < 0)
>  		return tp;
>
> @@ -881,11 +959,23 @@ static int thermal_profile_setup(struct platform_device *device)
>  	 * call thermal profile write command to ensure that the firmware correctly
>  	 * sets the OEM variables for the DPTF
>  	 */
> -	err = hp_wmi_perform_query(HPWMI_THERMAL_PROFILE_QUERY, HPWMI_WRITE, &tp,
> -							   sizeof(tp), 0);
> +	err = thermal_profile_set(tp);
>  	if (err)
>  		return err;
>
> +	platform_profile_handler.profile_get = platform_profile_get,
> +	platform_profile_handler.profile_set = platform_profile_set,
> +
> +	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_COOL, platform_profile_handler.choices);
> +	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED, platform_profile_handler.choices);
> +	set_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE, platform_profile_handler.choices);
> +
> +	err = platform_profile_register(&platform_profile_handler);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> +
> +	platform_profile_support = 1;
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>
> @@ -900,7 +990,7 @@ static int __init hp_wmi_bios_setup(struct platform_device *device)
>  	if (hp_wmi_rfkill_setup(device))
>  		hp_wmi_rfkill2_setup(device);
>
> -	thermal_profile_setup(device);
> +	thermal_profile_setup();
>
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -1030,5 +1120,8 @@ static void __exit hp_wmi_exit(void)
>  		platform_device_unregister(hp_wmi_platform_dev);
>  		platform_driver_unregister(&hp_wmi_driver);
>  	}
> +
> +	if (platform_profile_support)
> +		platform_profile_remove();

I personally don't like the asymmetry that hp_wmi_bios_setup() registers (even
if only indirectly), but hp_wmi_exit() removes. I'd put this in hp_wmi_bios_remove().


>  }
>  module_exit(hp_wmi_exit);
> --
> 2.29.2


Regards,
Barnabás Pőcze