Re: [PATCH 0/2] platform/x86: lenovo-wmi-capdata: Add debugfs file for dumping capdata

[Kurt Borja]

On Tue Feb 10, 2026 at 2:19 PM -05, Rong Zhang wrote:
> The Lenovo GameZone/Other interfaces have some delicate divergences
> among different devices. When making a bug report or adding support for
> new devices/interfaces, capdata is the most important information to
> cross-check with.
>
> Add a debugfs file (lenovo_wmi/<device_name>/capdata), so that users can
> dump capdata and include it in their reports.
>
> The output is like:
>
>   LENOVO_CAPABILITY_DATA_00[0]:
>     id:             0x00010000 [dev:  0, feat:  1, mode:  0, type:  0]
>     supported:      0x00000007 [ RWV]
>     default_value:  0
>
>   LENOVO_CAPABILITY_DATA_01[0]:
>     id:             0x00000000 [dev:  0, feat:  0, mode:  0, type:  0]
>     supported:      0x00000000 [    ]
>     default_value:  0
>     step:           0
>     min_value:      0
>     max_value:      0
>
>   LENOVO_FAN_TEST_DATA[0]:
>     id:             1
>     min_rpm:        2200
>     max_rpm:        5000
>
> A helper function for creating per-devcie debugfs directories is also
> introduced into lenovo-wmi-helpers in order that we can maintain a tidy
> directory structure in debugfs.
>
> The series is based on platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo-next since it
> depends on a commit there. I am OK to wait until the next cycle.
>
> Rong Zhang (2):
>   platform/x86: lenovo-wmi-helpers: Add helper for creating per-device
>     debugfs dir
>   platform/x86: lenovo-wmi-capdata: Add debugfs file for dumping capdata
>
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/Kconfig       |   1 +
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/wmi-capdata.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/wmi-capdata.h |   4 +-
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/wmi-helpers.c |  34 ++++++
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/wmi-helpers.h |   2 +
>  5 files changed, 159 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>
> base-commit: 5a5203a45b063a594e89a2aeaf9e4923893a5b4c

Hi Rong,

This is indeed very useful debug information.

Once you and Derek agree on the approach for this series, I'll add my
Tested-by tag.

One more thing though. Can you please explain the "supported" byte? What
is `+` and `V` supposed to mean?

-- 
Thanks,
 ~ Kurt