From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.tuxedocomputers.com (mail.tuxedocomputers.com [157.90.84.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C56BE26E6EB; Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:57:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=157.90.84.7 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764079066; cv=none; b=e0Bcc6LSooiJKYfRMO5EDXXMZFtFxJPh4yp9PMmUEdAY72KHWU46I62E7subLi6QM8ap2mh8nlPSb0pKWe5vSAVm4716WP2jw/LUYBBij6HhXFZCkCU9/SOirF2Oi0uuBaoFRM3XoY4U6o17+id9j2qBJ8XJaImdm2OwmHRCtoI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764079066; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1fD82IlXtkUL6/mjCSV5+rtcFmxfrY9OSzQ7x/ltcnc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=VjUqf3GlPGfQvUSn8L/SDYLDW2jnk+VL7CefDp9397uGr10aYAXt+8i1pSrZO/DN/AT2uaCyHBIfyRJ3jgkBtN5AJllFWA2x4yWU5lqTSP93SQbhtzdjWNoVlDU/9z6GzWe7DNMOvfQpCuc/dvrit/jnuAp6Hpb7CbQIaEkjVtY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=tuxedocomputers.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tuxedocomputers.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=tuxedocomputers.com header.i=@tuxedocomputers.com header.b=fDIaNY4x; arc=none smtp.client-ip=157.90.84.7 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=tuxedocomputers.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tuxedocomputers.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=tuxedocomputers.com header.i=@tuxedocomputers.com header.b="fDIaNY4x" Received: from wse-pc.fritz.box (pd9e597c7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.229.151.199]) (Authenticated sender: wse@tuxedocomputers.com) by mail.tuxedocomputers.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1C5032FC004D; Tue, 25 Nov 2025 14:57:41 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxedocomputers.com; s=default; t=1764079061; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TGEKjfcxqIrLWPUdRQ2o9PmcRcRYhALc12y070Xe8RQ=; b=fDIaNY4xHBgYqLbDg/MnT9BhLsuQmKSOExCzvxHwheeMV7QnXIPWmE1k76uoyvehYCCgBm FXj3Se7e7fKB7tv4zA8TFQLg3HmwCUvcoEi2cgA+sRfbEv8xGnn1a3w7amCKsA6z/BeCc4 LQytsnWpOPszrjT7ETLY9qZMYHr6pws= Authentication-Results: mail.tuxedocomputers.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=wse@tuxedocomputers.com smtp.mailfrom=wse@tuxedocomputers.com From: Werner Sembach To: W_Armin@gmx.de, hansg@kernel.org, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Werner Sembach Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/2] platform/x86: uniwill-laptop: Introduce device descriptor system Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 14:49:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20251125135729.487837-1-wse@tuxedocomputers.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The first patch of this RFC is based on a PoC by Armin and extended the be able to modify feature bits based on readouts from the EC Memory. The 2nd patch is a new feature that requires such a modification. Armin what do you think? Is this a clean approach? Technically the feature bits can be modified arbitrarily, but it should only ever be accessed by the slightly modified getter method, so the risk should be very minimal. I wonder if the static device_descriptor variable can somehow be skipped, but it doesn't bother to have it there either IMHO. Armin Wolf (1): platform/x86: uniwill-laptop: Introduce device descriptor system Werner Sembach (1): platform/x86/uniwill: Implement cTGP setting drivers/platform/x86/uniwill/uniwill-acpi.c | 269 +++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 240 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) -- 2.43.0