Re: platform_profile: power-saver lost on Panther Lake when SoC Power Slider and dell-pc are both bound (low-power vs quiet)

["Lyndon Sanche" <lsanche@lyndeno.ca>]

Hello, thank you for reporting this.

To me there are a number of ways we could handle this.

On Fri Oct 16, 2026 at 1:10 PM EDT, verazimmerman1987 wrote:
> This looks like the same class of problem as amd-pmf + asus-wmi,
> which was solved by adding "quiet" as a hidden choice in amd-pmf
> (commit 44e94fece517, "platform/x86/amd: pmf: Add 'quiet' to hidden
> choices"). Would a similar hidden "quiet" (and perhaps "cool") choice
> for the Intel SoC Power Slider, mapped to its low-power setting, be
> acceptable? I'm happy to test patches.

This certainly would fix the immediate issue: platform_profile providing
consistent choices across handlers to allow selecting a range of
profiles exposed by the system. I feel like there is a better way to
handle this besides adding hidden profiles.

What if platform_profile itself was changed to separate the user/system
choice: the "desired" profile, from the "actual" profile(s)? In this
scenario, different drivers expose different possible profiles, the
system tries to apply the closest possible profile per-driver to the
user's choice. The possible profiles would have an index to indicate
where on a linear scale it lays. If I request quiet (2), but the Intel
SoC slider only implements power-saver (3), the system chooses 3 for
that driver.

I am only thinking out loud and would find comments on this to be
useful. I realize the behaviour of some profiles do not exactly fall on
a linear scale so this would need consideration as well.

Thanks,

Lyndon