From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Shaposhnikov Daniil <2minesweeper2@gmail.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hansg@kernel.org>,
ayman.bagabas@gmail.com, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: huawei-wmi: add ACPI fallback for Fn-lock on newer models
Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 13:16:25 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <22a07bfe-5c60-82be-9d4a-56ff2a29bdba@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260524121510.36961-1-2minesweeper2@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5210 bytes --]
On Sun, 24 May 2026, Shaposhnikov Daniil wrote:
> Newer Huawei laptops (e.g. FLMH-XX / MateBook 14 2024) no longer support
> the legacy WMI interface for Fn-lock control. Instead, they expose direct
> ACPI methods \GFRS and \SFRS (Get/Set Fn key Reversal Status) which
> communicate with the EC via registers 0x6B (read) and 0x6C (write).
>
> Add huawei_acpi_fn_lock_get() and huawei_acpi_fn_lock_set() helpers that
> use acpi_evaluate_object() to call these methods. Both
> huawei_wmi_fn_lock_get() and huawei_wmi_fn_lock_set() now probe for
> \GFRS/\SFRS via acpi_has_method() first and fall back to the legacy WMI
> path if not present.
>
> Tested on: HUAWEI FLMH-XX (MateBook 14 2024),
> CachyOS (kernel 7.0.9-1-cachyos).
>
> Signed-off-by: Shaposhnikov Daniil <2minesweeper2@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 95 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c
> index 93cca17fdf58..19cd8f1a8e33 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c
> @@ -527,11 +527,101 @@ static void huawei_wmi_battery_exit(struct device *dev)
>
> /* Fn lock */
>
> +/*
> + * Newer Huawei models (e.g. HUAWEI FLMH-XX / MateBook 14 2024) use direct
> + * ACPI methods \GFRS / \SFRS (Get/Set Fn key Reversal Status) to control
> + * Fn-lock via EC registers 0x6B (read) and 0x6C (write).
> + *
> + * GFRS response buffer layout:
> + * byte[0] = STAT (0 = success)
> + * byte[1] = 0x01 (fn-lock off) or 0x02 (fn-lock on)
> + *
> + * SFRS argument layout (CreateByteField(Arg0, 0x02, FRSR)):
> + * Value is read from byte[2] of the integer argument, so it must be
> + * passed as (value << 16):
> + * (1 << 16) = fn-lock off (writes 0x55 to EC 0x6C)
> + * (2 << 16) = fn-lock on (writes 0x5A to EC 0x6C)
> + */
> +
> +static int huawei_acpi_fn_lock_get(int *on)
> +{
> + union acpi_object acpi_arg, *obj;
> + struct acpi_object_list arg_list = { .count = 1, .pointer = &acpi_arg };
> + struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> + acpi_status status;
> + u8 val;
> +
> + acpi_arg.type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> + acpi_arg.integer.value = 0;
> +
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(NULL, "\\GFRS", &arg_list, &output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + obj = output.pointer;
You must use __free() here to avoid duplicating kfree() (move the
variable declaration mid-function).
> + if (!obj || obj->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || obj->buffer.length < 2) {
> + kfree(obj);
> + return -ENODATA;
> + }
> +
> + /* byte[0] = STAT (0 = success), byte[1] = 1 (off) or 2 (on) */
> + if (obj->buffer.pointer[0] != 0) {
> + kfree(obj);
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +
> + val = obj->buffer.pointer[1];
> + if (val != 1 && val != 2) {
These magic literals should be replaced with using named defines.
> + kfree(obj);
> + return -ENODATA;
> + }
> +
> + if (on)
> + *on = val - 1; /* 1→0 (off), 2→1 (on) */
This too is unnecessarily cryptic (on a non-performance critical path).
One option would be to convert these two if blocks into a single
switch/case. You need to duplicate the if (on) to both case blocks but
that doesn't look too bad.
> +
> + kfree(obj);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int huawei_acpi_fn_lock_set(int on)
> +{
> + union acpi_object acpi_arg, *obj;
> + struct acpi_object_list arg_list = { .count = 1, .pointer = &acpi_arg };
> + struct acpi_buffer output = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> + acpi_status status;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + /*
> + * SFRS reads byte[2] of its argument via CreateByteField(Arg0, 0x02).
> + * on=0 → FRSR=1 → EC gets 0x55 (fn-lock off)
> + * on=1 → FRSR=2 → EC gets 0x5A (fn-lock on)
> + */
> + acpi_arg.type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> + acpi_arg.integer.value = (u64)(on + 1) << 16;
Please make a named define instead.
The cast looks unnecessary.
> +
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(NULL, "\\SFRS", &arg_list, &output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + return -EIO;
> +
> + obj = output.pointer;
As with above, please use __free()...
> + if (obj && obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER &&
> + obj->buffer.length >= 1 && obj->buffer.pointer[0] != 0)
> + ret = -EIO;
...This can then return immediately.
> +
> + kfree(obj);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static int huawei_wmi_fn_lock_get(int *on)
> {
> u8 ret[0x100] = { 0 };
> int err, i;
>
> + /* Newer models: use direct ACPI \GFRS method */
> + if (acpi_has_method(NULL, "\\GFRS"))
> + return huawei_acpi_fn_lock_get(on);
> +
> + /* Legacy WMI fallback */
> err = huawei_wmi_cmd(FN_LOCK_GET, ret, 0x100);
> if (err)
> return err;
> @@ -550,6 +640,11 @@ static int huawei_wmi_fn_lock_set(int on)
> {
> union hwmi_arg arg;
>
> + /* Newer models: use direct ACPI \SFRS method */
> + if (acpi_has_method(NULL, "\\SFRS"))
> + return huawei_acpi_fn_lock_set(on);
> +
> + /* Legacy WMI fallback */
> arg.cmd = FN_LOCK_SET;
> arg.args[2] = on + 1; // 0 undefined, 1 off, 2 on.
>
>
--
i.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-25 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-24 12:15 Shaposhnikov Daniil
2026-05-25 10:16 ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2026-05-25 12:17 ` [PATCH v2 0/1] " Shaposhnikov Daniil
2026-05-25 12:17 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] " Shaposhnikov Daniil
2026-05-25 12:33 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-05-25 13:00 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] " Shaposhnikov Daniil
2026-05-25 13:00 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Shaposhnikov Daniil
2026-07-07 17:07 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] " Ilpo Järvinen
2026-05-25 18:38 ` [PATCH] " Ayman Bagabas
2026-05-25 19:22 ` Superstes
[not found] ` <CALOxGBVJzk4GX2xrG3N1Djy1UZhMXMdcYKeJQuBqcf289SO32w@mail.gmail.com>
2026-05-26 8:58 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-05-26 9:09 ` Superstes
2026-06-22 9:43 ` Superstes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=22a07bfe-5c60-82be-9d4a-56ff2a29bdba@linux.intel.com \
--to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=2minesweeper2@gmail.com \
--cc=ayman.bagabas@gmail.com \
--cc=hansg@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome