[PATCH] platform/x86: asus-armoury: add support for GU605CR

[PATCH] platform/x86: asus-armoury: add support for GU605CR

[Denis Benato]

Add TDP data for laptop model GU605CR.

Signed-off-by: Denis Benato <denis.benato@linux.dev>
---
 drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
index a1bb2005c3f3..d8814165d480 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
@@ -950,6 +950,35 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id power_limits[] = {
 			},
 		},
 	},
+	{
+		.matches = {
+			DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GU605CR"),
+		},
+		.driver_data = &(struct power_data) {
+			.ac_data = &(struct power_limits) {
+				.ppt_pl1_spl_min = 30,
+				.ppt_pl1_spl_max = 85,
+				.ppt_pl2_sppt_min = 38,
+				.ppt_pl2_sppt_max = 110,
+				.nv_dynamic_boost_min = 5,
+				.nv_dynamic_boost_max = 20,
+				.nv_temp_target_min = 75,
+				.nv_temp_target_max = 87,
+				.nv_tgp_min = 80,
+				.nv_tgp_def = 90,
+				.nv_tgp_max = 105,
+			},
+			.dc_data = &(struct power_limits) {
+				.ppt_pl1_spl_min = 30,
+				.ppt_pl1_spl_max = 85,
+				.ppt_pl2_sppt_min = 38,
+				.ppt_pl2_sppt_max = 110,
+				.nv_temp_target_min = 75,
+				.nv_temp_target_max = 87,
+			},
+			.requires_fan_curve = true,
+		},
+	},
 	{
 		.matches = {
 			DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GU605CW"),
-- 
2.52.0

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: asus-armoury: add support for GU605CR

[Ilpo Järvinen]

On Thu, 25 Dec 2025, Denis Benato wrote:

> Add TDP data for laptop model GU605CR.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Denis Benato <denis.benato@linux.dev>

Hi Denis,

I've applied these 4 to the review-ilpo-fixes branch, but next time please 
please make them a series instead of sending 4 very similar ID addition 
changes to the same file independently.

A series is easier for me to apply as a whole than 4 patches individually. 
Also, series won't cause some messy misapplication as easily as individual 
patches that can be applied in order different from what was used by the 
submitter to create them (it seems there were no context conflicts with 
these but I had to check that == extra work for me).

-- 
 i.

> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
> index a1bb2005c3f3..d8814165d480 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
> @@ -950,6 +950,35 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id power_limits[] = {
>  			},
>  		},
>  	},
> +	{
> +		.matches = {
> +			DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GU605CR"),
> +		},
> +		.driver_data = &(struct power_data) {
> +			.ac_data = &(struct power_limits) {
> +				.ppt_pl1_spl_min = 30,
> +				.ppt_pl1_spl_max = 85,
> +				.ppt_pl2_sppt_min = 38,
> +				.ppt_pl2_sppt_max = 110,
> +				.nv_dynamic_boost_min = 5,
> +				.nv_dynamic_boost_max = 20,
> +				.nv_temp_target_min = 75,
> +				.nv_temp_target_max = 87,
> +				.nv_tgp_min = 80,
> +				.nv_tgp_def = 90,
> +				.nv_tgp_max = 105,
> +			},
> +			.dc_data = &(struct power_limits) {
> +				.ppt_pl1_spl_min = 30,
> +				.ppt_pl1_spl_max = 85,
> +				.ppt_pl2_sppt_min = 38,
> +				.ppt_pl2_sppt_max = 110,
> +				.nv_temp_target_min = 75,
> +				.nv_temp_target_max = 87,
> +			},
> +			.requires_fan_curve = true,
> +		},
> +	},
>  	{
>  		.matches = {
>  			DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GU605CW"),
> 

Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: asus-armoury: add support for GU605CR

[Denis Benato]

On 12/29/25 14:09, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Dec 2025, Denis Benato wrote:
>
>> Add TDP data for laptop model GU605CR.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Denis Benato <denis.benato@linux.dev>
> Hi Denis,
>
> I've applied these 4 to the review-ilpo-fixes branch, but next time please 
> please make them a series instead of sending 4 very similar ID addition 
> changes to the same file independently.
>
> A series is easier for me to apply as a whole than 4 patches individually. 
> Also, series won't cause some messy misapplication as easily as individual 
> patches that can be applied in order different from what was used by the 
> submitter to create them (it seems there were no context conflicts with 
> these but I had to check that == extra work for me).
>
Hi,

Thank you, I'll keep this in mind.