Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] acpi: platform_profile - Add Extreme profile option

[Derek J. Clark]

On November 10, 2025 9:17:12 PM PST, Mario Limonciello <superm1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>On 11/10/25 5:14 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 Nov 2025, Derek J. Clark wrote:
>> 
>>> Some devices, namely Lenovo Legion devices, have an "extreme" mode where
>>> power draw is at the maximum limit of the cooling hardware. Add a new
>>> "extreme" platform profile to properly reflect this operating mode.
>>> 
>>> Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Derek J. Clark <derekjohn.clark@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-platform-profile | 2 ++
>>>   drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c                        | 1 +
>>>   include/linux/platform_profile.h                       | 1 +
>>>   3 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-platform-profile b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-platform-profile
>>> index dc72adfb830a..9bee8deb4dc9 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-platform-profile
>>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-platform-profile
>>> @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ Description:	This file contains a space-separated list of profiles supported
>>>   					power consumption with a slight bias
>>>   					towards performance
>>>   		performance		High performance operation
>>> +		extreme			Higher performance operation that may exceed
>>> +					internal battery draw limits when on AC power
>>>   		custom			Driver defined custom profile
>>>   		====================	========================================
>>>   diff --git a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>>> index b43f4459a4f6..78da17e16d9b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>>> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ static const char * const profile_names[] = {
>>>   	[PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED] = "balanced",
>>>   	[PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED_PERFORMANCE] = "balanced-performance",
>>>   	[PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE] = "performance",
>>> +	[PLATFORM_PROFILE_EXTREME] = "extreme",
>>>   	[PLATFORM_PROFILE_CUSTOM] = "custom",
>>>   };
>>>   static_assert(ARRAY_SIZE(profile_names) == PLATFORM_PROFILE_LAST);
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/platform_profile.h b/include/linux/platform_profile.h
>>> index a299225ab92e..2bf178bde2b5 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/platform_profile.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/platform_profile.h
>>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ enum platform_profile_option {
>>>   	PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED,
>>>   	PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED_PERFORMANCE,
>>>   	PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE,
>>> +	PLATFORM_PROFILE_EXTREME,
>>>   	PLATFORM_PROFILE_CUSTOM,
>>>   	PLATFORM_PROFILE_LAST, /*must always be last */
>>>   };
>>> 
>> 
>> I wonder if "extreme" is the best name for this? Given the description you
>> gave above, perhaps "max-power" would be more descriptive (and we already
>> have "low-power" so it kind of feels fitting the theme too).
>> 
>> I don't have strong opinion on this so if you guys feel this suggestion
>> would not make things better, feel free to voice it. :-)
>> 
>
>I don't feel strongly here, either sound find to me.
>
Fine with me. Extreme is the vendor (marketing) specific phrase but the low/max-power symmetry is nicer. I'll try to spin a v3 today or tomorrow.

Thanks,
Derek