From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C14E320B; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 02:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721183691; cv=none; b=MOtvgOJZZlFtMuyKnxX6REoGS+wzThDUN5dHYh1WqZv5xx8DaADo/KgZt8tVQ3jUYeoz305d/cHv0aPHTBGa8BbdXBffQrS2xuuLR9QDjX7azp9iC9h5Orb4zQa5jzMA994ZHadLazjaMgv4ou017J3291hhUdne8QOJlSzEHxw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721183691; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s508GMUD55YkvfpV5rDzEB48jcAuAy4o4TDmH8hmkcY=; h=MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:To:Cc: Subject:Content-Type; b=F4YKohzAiCplyPh93hV0GocX2x+xYwaLo91P8pn+jYxr3s+Mg+6FDuKc1dDD2AHWTxyxxuUnv/mA0W4YVj1FoJftEiJ97bxvubWmEGh3915nv/Fuf2s9CUuQdVICqZ5dXY/zQJJ8g0+QDotfHdjdPr9KMtPZktnfZQwe/GgDMGI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ljones.dev; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ljones.dev; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ljones.dev header.i=@ljones.dev header.b=sxJEp+w4; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=sCYIK8VT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ljones.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ljones.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ljones.dev header.i=@ljones.dev header.b="sxJEp+w4"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="sCYIK8VT" Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfhigh.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A88114806D; Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:34:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap52 ([10.202.2.102]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:34:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ljones.dev; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1721183688; x=1721270088; bh=5e+PEx4nBMHw+X2jMix1TzvpU4CTfhbsw0jM9VxrD2c=; b= sxJEp+w4IGZI1CdSL/9wjvpgxx2qXnR1HKHtx5kF5nIUsqZmgaGtdAwxR8RbMEyi PcKhSp7xL7aCNwt6wjSlHZf5AqM30bMZUP++hx40rI4r55K78AXFY6yN7vlL9+XI uLhZcF1ARimcxrLfrdmAMryxTcKJWH6dFWebQKd8/r356JZmAGsjVoH0DnsrJKNd vsVcVDgmn85dDl+s195LSyQYY/g3mtQSItDmTE7GqHo3pHPvxsdnMf/O+cQj0L5C QZaGsDIqnxGi1xzFKxqzY8KdsBQxqXx6hDaKT436wD4nLG/TONXQa2GqCpKUDClB NvPotzm3DVeH9lvuk8E/tA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1721183688; x= 1721270088; bh=5e+PEx4nBMHw+X2jMix1TzvpU4CTfhbsw0jM9VxrD2c=; b=s CYIK8VTYhybhRS8NLxe3eYGMrcCr3OKolBb6eS7GIMilupVUy6dm8TAMrtAnembk 2GpOKkRe4uUEDy8wm0zoW9VElC7W58Gy8IJZyc52j1ueU9WySJNearX8XPP2GJY7 xek174minbcPMGmfIROl6+MGksARk5YxCqvKhKajlXj+JKHs7BazHot7KxBn29IQ WIBKCVR+ynU2CUHj6CT6ZNo/nuXEVZirRRbM/kJiOmua9ClEJcYc9WFf/8mxQ/dr 5cUA6uR1ft992txkk7y62LWaYwUxCV+U5b/4l3s/BsMvBuW2qtzt3BZmDvcIz9Fj EbO+dwLUKZn5auxnb6bKQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrgeehgdeifecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvvefutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfhu khgvucflohhnvghsfdcuoehluhhkvgeslhhjohhnvghsrdguvghvqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeukeeitdeftefhuedugeeitdevffetfeeuieevjeeigeekhefggefhfffgkeet veenucffohhmrghinhepkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhhukhgvsehljhhonhgvshdruggvvh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i5ec1447f:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id CC4AEC60098; Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:34:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-568-g843fbadbe-fm-20240701.003-g843fbadb Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1e309d39-43d3-4054-88a9-0c1da3de26eb@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240716051612.64842-1-luke@ljones.dev> <8273ed57-4c65-41da-ad7d-907acf168c07@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:34:26 +1200 From: "Luke Jones" To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ilpo_J=C3=A4rvinen?= , "Hans de Goede" Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, corentin.chary@gmail.com, "Mario Limonciello" , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] platform/x86: introduce asus-bioscfg Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 17 Jul 2024, at 3:11 AM, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, Hans de Goede wrote: > > On 7/16/24 7:16 AM, Luke D. Jones wrote: > > > This is the first major patch I've ever done with the intention of > > > introducing a new module, so it's highly likely I've made some mis= takes > > > or misunderstood something. > > >=20 > > > TL;DR: > > > 1. introduce new module to contain bios attributes, using fw_attri= butes_class > > > 2. deprecate all possible attributes from asus-wmi that were added= ad-hoc > > > 3. remove those in the next LTS cycle > > >=20 > > > The idea for this originates from a conversation with Mario Limonc= iello > > > https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/371d4109-a3bb-4c3b-802= f-4ec27a945c99@amd.com/ > > >=20 > > > It is without a doubt much cleaner to use, easier to discover, and= the > > > API is well defined as opposed to the random clutter of attributes= I had > > > been placing in the platform sysfs. > >=20 > > This is a bit of a novel use of the fw_attributes_class and I'm not > > entirely sure of what to think of this. > >=20 > > The fw_attributes_class API was designed for (mostly enterprise) > > x86 machines where it is possible to change all BIOS settings direct= ly > > from the OS without entering the BIOS. > >=20 > > Here some ACPI or WMI function is present to actually enumerate all > > the BIOS options (which can be set this way) and get there type. > >=20 > > IOW there is not a static list of options inside the driver, nor > > is there special handling in the driver other then handling differen= ces > > per type. > >=20 > > And if a new BIOS version has new options or a different machine mod= el > > has different options then these are discovered automatically. > >=20 > > This new use is quite different from this. Although I do see that > > at least for the attributes using WMI_STORE_INT() + WMI_SHOW_INT() > > that there is quite some commonality between some of the attributes. > >=20 > > I see how using the existing firmware-attributes class API definition > > for this, including allow tweaking this with some of the fwupd > > firmware-attributes class commandline util work Mario did is a useful > > thing to have. > >=20 > > I guess using the firmware-attributes class for this is ok, but > > this _must_ not be named bioscfg, since the existing hp-bioscfg > > driver is a "classic" firmware-attributes drivers enumerating all > > the options through BIOS provided enumeration functions and I want > > the name to make it clear that this is not that. And the Dell > > implementation is called dell-wmi-sysman so lets also avoid sysman > > as name. > >=20 > > Maybe call it "asus-bios-tunables" ? And then if Asus actually > > implements some more classic firmware-attributes enumerable interface > > we can use "asus-bioscfg" for that. > >=20 > > Mario, Ilpo what is your opinion on this ? >=20 > What you suggested sounds good to me. Thanks guys. I think there might be a few names that could be suitable 1. asus_bios_tuning/tunables 2. asus_fw_tuning/tunables 3. asus_fw_settings 4. asus_armoury I'm shying away from the "tuning/tunables" label since there are also a = lot of settings which are just toggles for various features rather than = actual tunable things. It makes sense in some contexts at least. Armoury Crate is the software collection that Asus uses for the gaming l= aptops, and they tend to lump these settings under that label. Personally I'm leaning towards "asus_fw_settings" as it more accurately = describes what the module does.