Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] platform/x86: firmware_attributes_class: Add a high level API

["Kurt Borja" <kuurtb@gmail.com>]

On Sun Jun 22, 2025 at 12:42 AM -03, Derek J. Clark wrote:
>
>
> On June 21, 2025 8:27:06 PM PDT, Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Sun Jun 22, 2025 at 12:01 AM -03, Derek J. Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On June 21, 2025 5:04:03 PM PDT, Kurt Borja <kuurtb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>I apologize for taking so long. I've been a bit busy these last few
>>>>weeks.
>>>>
>>>>After my discussion with Joshua on v2, I realized the API I made was not
>>>>ergonomic at all and it didn't exactly respond to driver needs. In this
>>>>version I tried a completely different approach and IMO it's much much
>>>>better now.
>>>>
>>>>First of all I adopted standard sysfs terminology for everything. A
>>>>"firmware attribute" is just an attribute_group under the attributes/
>>>>directory so everything related to this concept is just called "group"
>>>>now. Everything refered as properties in the previous patch are now just
>>>>plain "attributes".
>>>>
>>>>This new API revolves around the `fwat_{bool,enum,int,str}_data`
>>>>structs. These hold all the metadata a "firmware_attribute" of that
>>>>given type needs.
>>>>
>>>>These structs also hold `read` and `write` callbacks for the
>>>>current_value attribute, because obviously that value is always dynamic.
>>>>However the rest of attributes (default_value, display_name, min, max,
>>>>etc) are constant.
>>>
>>> Hi Kurt,
>>>
>>> In the lenovo-wmi drivers the min/max for multiple attributes are actually dynamic based on if power is AC connected or on battery. Looking at patch 2 I might be able to do some pointer manipulation with the attribute's "data" member for those events to make this work, but it would be a lot easier if there was a simple way for me to call my own functions here instead. Perhaps a function pointer could be used to override the default method here? 
>>
>>Hi Derek,
>>
>>All attributes in a given group have the same show method. Maybe we can
>>let users override this with their own show method, i.e. Add a
>>
>>	ssize_t (*attr_show)(struct device *dev, const struct fwat_attribute *attr, const char *buf)
>>
>>to struct fwat_group_data. That should be fairly simple to implement.
>>
>>Did you have another solution in mind?
>>
>>
>
> That should work, yeah. 
> - Derek

Just realized that's exactly what you said :)

It was indeed easy to implement. It will be there for next version.


-- 
 ~ Kurt