Re: [PATCH v6 0/1] asus-wmi: Add support for custom fan curves

[Luke Jones]

On Sun, Aug 29 2021 at 11:57:55 +0200, Hans de Goede 
<hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> On 8/29/21 9:14 AM, Luke D. Jones wrote:
> >  Add support for custom fan curves found on some ASUS ROG laptops.
> >
> >  - V1
> >    + Initial patch work
> >  - V2
> >    + Don't fail and remove wmi driver if error from
> >      asus_wmi_evaluate_method_buf() if error is -ENODEV
> >  - V3
> >    + Store the "default" fan curves
> >    + Call throttle_thermal_policy_write() if a curve is erased to 
> > ensure
> >      that the factory default for a profile is applied again
> >  - V4
> >    + Do not apply default curves by default. Testers have found that 
> > the
> >      default curves don't quite match actual no-curve behaviours
> >    + Add method to enable/disable curves for each profile
> >  - V5
> >    + Remove an unrequired function left over from previous iterations
> >    + Ensure default curves are applied if user writes " " to a curve 
> > path
> >    + Rename "active_fan_curve_profiles" to 
> > "enabled_fan_curve_profiles" to
> >      better reflect the behavious of this setting
> >    + Move throttle_thermal_policy_write_*pu_curves() and rename to
> >      fan_curve_*pu_write()
> >    + Merge fan_curve_check_valid() and fan_curve_write()
> >    + Remove some leftover debug statements
> >  - V6
> >    + Refactor data structs to store  array or u8 instead of strings.
> >      This affects the entire patch except the enabled_fan_curves 
> > block
> >    + Use sysfs_match_string in enabled_fan_curve block
> >    + Add some extra comments to describe things
> >    + Allow some variation in how fan curve input can be formatted
> >    + Use SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR_2_RW() to reduce the amount of lines per
> >      fan+profile combo drastically
>
> Thank you for your continued work on this. I read in the discussin of 
> v5
> that you discussed using the standard auto_point#_pwm, 
> auto_point#_temp
> pairs. I see here that you have decided to not go that route, may I 
> ask
> why ?

Sure, primary reason is because the RPM for the fans is in percentage 
so it didn't really make sense to me to use that format.

Also if the max for that is 255 then I'd need to introduce scaling to 
make match what the ACPI method expects (max 100). But yeah, 
auto_point#_pwm changes the meaning.

> Regards,
>
> Hans