Re: [PATCH 0/3] ACPI: platform_profile: fix legacy sysfs with multiple handlers

[Luke Jones <luke@ljones.dev>]

On Mon, 2025-02-24 at 22:58 +0100, Antheas Kapenekakis wrote:
> I will tell you that compared with other manufacturers, when asus
> says
> quiet, they mean quiet and not low power
> 
> Z13's quiet mode is 40W, not very low-power if you ask me. Ally X
> uses
> 13w+boost, a source of many complaints. Other manufacturers use
> around
> 8W for low power modes.
> 
> In any case, any rename might break user scripts and there are
> actually 3 types of low power profiles:
> PLATFORM_PROFILE_COOL
> PLATFORM_PROFILE_QUIET
> PLATFORM_PROFILE_LOW_POWER
> 
> Then, there is also:
> PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED_PERFORMANCE
> 
> Some ACER laptops implement many of those
> 
> Obscuring any of those is not ideal.
> 

In the context of their other modes it is low power. If there is
confusion over what this is meant to mean for all vendors then it
should be clarified in the relevant documentation.

low-power		Low power consumption
cool			Cooler operation
quiet			Quieter operation
balanced		Balance between low power consumption
			and performance
balanced-performance	Balance between performance and low
			power consumption with a slight bias
			towards performance
performance		High performance operation
custom			Driver defined custom profile


"Low power consumption" compared to?

If these "scripts" use `platform_profile_choices` to get their
selections and verify they are available then there should be zero
breakage. If they don't then they should be updated to be correct.

In any case I am in the process of finalising an update to use the new
platform_profile API including "custom". Please don't begin trying to
break things just to be "first". My work has been ongoing for this in
my spare time for months.