Set battery extender on and charge limit to 80%. Yesterday, the battery discharged to 80% and stayed there. Then used the laptop only on battery before putting on charge overnight. Woke up this morning and battery is at 100% and staying there. HWINFO shows battery charging (0W charge rate when laptop being used, so net charging).
Edit: Perhaps the battery extender is overwriting the charge limit once it has been reset by going on battery? This would be wrong behaviour. The charge limit should still be respected.
Iām honestly still confused as to how these two features are supposed to interact. The documentation at the top doesnāt make it clear (each feature is clear, just not the interaction). It would be good to get it clarified from an official source.
I understand that if I have charge limit enabled at 80%, and battery saver disabled, the battery should not charge over 80%.
I understand that if I have charge limit disabled, and battery saver enabled with default settings, the battery should charge to 100%, then after 5 days of being plugged in discharge to 90%, then after 7 days discharge to 85%, with a 5% floating window.
However, if I have charge limit enabled at 80%, and battery saver enabled with the default settingsā¦? Does it take over from the charge limit? Do the percentage maxes above (100, 90, 85) get levelled at the charge limit (becoming 80, 70 and 65)? Should the battery saver only work without a charge limit?
Maybe itās cause of where I am with work planning right now. but I am in dire need of some BDD āgiven when thenā statements for these features lol.
I looked at the EC source code that is on github. It is basically a bit of a mess, with conflicting power rules so I am not surprised the result is something that does not quite work as expected.
I think if FW listed what there intended rules are, the community could then fix all the bugs for them.
It is not at all clear when the battery save features should apply and when the charge limit should apply, and when the battery should discharge even with a psu connected.
There should be a single function in the EC source code that runs through all the rules and gives the result. Not having the rules scattered about.
But to be fair, battery management is difficult. There are all sorts of edge cases where the battery might not respond correctly, and those all have to be detected and worked around.
Update went fine. First time I set the charge limit to 80%, it wasnāt respected (battery was above the limit and continued to charge). I went to the BIOS again, changing the charge limit to 90%, reboot, then back to 80%. For now it is respected, but that is no different from 3.0.7 which respected the limit for a while before breaking. Now Iāll need to wait if this time the charge limit sticks across multiple reboots. Iāll report back in a couple of days.
Technically, I think you should always use one or the other. The battery charge limit or the battery extender. Granted, I personally think the charge limit should override the extender, but it seems to be the other way aroundā¦maybe?
I think to ensure we do or do not have a bug, or whether we just want to suggest that the charge limit takes precedent instead of the battery life extender whenever both are on, we need to be clear about the testing and conditions during which the charge limit doesnāt seem to be honored.
Was the charge limit ignored with the battery life extender also turned on?
Was the charge limit ignored with the battery life extender turned off?
There was a lengthy discussion about this on the thread about 3.07. The conclusion was that the charge limit was broken, whether the battery extender was enabled or not. Framework acknowledged that there was a bug.
Technically, both functions could work together: The absolute maximum charge of the battery set by the charge limit, and a decrease from maximum charge set by the battery extender if the laptop is plugged in for a long time. The release notes seem to suggest that the starting limit for the battery extender is always 100%, not the currently set charge limit, and the laptop probably just charges to the lower limit of the two, so a charge limit of 80% will effectively leave the battery extender without effect.
I left the battery extender enabled, just because it is the default setting and there is no indication that it needs to be switched off for the charge limit to work. If the two conflict, that should be handled in the logic of the BIOS settings, IMHO.
I understand. But some people are starting to say it still isnāt working on 3.08, but itās not quite clear if they are trying to use the battery charge limit and the battery life extender at the same time. Technically, the wording of the āfixā is that they fixed a but that prevented the battery charge limit from working when the battery life extender is turned off.
So, Iām just hoping to clarify whether or not the battery charge limit will function properly when the battery life extender is turned off, or if that, at least, has been fixed.
I guess thatās what Iām hoping to determine. Do the two still conflict, and will the charge limit at least be honored if the battery life extender is turned off.
I had both enabled (as I described in the post above) and the battery stayed charging at 100%, charge limit being ignored. So, I disabled the battery extender, and the behaviour was the same - charge limit still being ignored. Finally, I went back into the BIOS and changed the charge limit. Now the charge limit seems to be applied correctly.
Maybe Iāve just been lucky, but for everything Iāve done, my AMD FW 13 has never had an issue for me. It has always worked with any charger Iāve tried to use, the fan is a little goofy sometimes, but not bad, all my ports always work for what I want to use them for, and the battery charge limit has always just worked.
I just updated to 3.08. Fingers crossed, lol. Iāll report back if I find any oddities. I currently have the battery extender turned off with the charge limit set to 80%, as Iāve always done. Weāll see.
Yes, it would be helpful if the installation instructions described a validated way to get the charge limit to stick. @Leo3418 mentions a cold boot. I guess time will tell as we gather more experience with this release. It is a shame we are back to debugging this. After the third successive BIOS release, surely it should just work?
Mine is holding at the 75% value I set so far, but I have switched off the battery extender because the description of how the extender works mentions charging to 100%.
That seems right to me, using the battery extender with your own limit doesnāt really make sense because the battery extender is designed to stop you holding the battery at 100% for too long. which you wonāt (and indeed canāt) be doing if youāre staying at a lower value.
Battery extender should initiate a toggle of battery limit and set to 100 and then grey it out so you canāt modify it, giving a clear indication that choosing to enable battery extender will disable the ability to set your battery limit.
Currently I have 3.08, battery extender off, charge limit set at 80%. Iāve done re-boots, connect charger while off, while sleeping, etc. So far, the charge limit is being honored. Iāll update if this changes, but so far, with 3.08 and the battery extender off, the charge limit seems to be working for me.
I canāt say 100%, but normally if there is some requirement to step through intermediate versions, they would say so. However, I will say that 3.07 is basically the same as 3.08, except with a bug fix for the battery charge limit. And 3.07 was āheld.ā So if itās safe to go straight to 3.07, it should certainly be safe to go straight to 3.08.
This morning I updated from 3.06 to 3.08. I know, thatās not 3.05, but I didnāt have to go to 3.07 first. I had no issues. The update went very smooth.
This is what I am finding as well. The charge limit seems to stick and apply as long as you have ābattery extenderā off completely. This should certainly be noted in the documentation, especially since the ābattery extenderā is apparently turned on by default. I also agree with @Arriad that one option should grey out the other.
So, thanks framework for fixing the battery limit.
Sorry, it was late. With battery extender off, the charge limit seems to now be an actual charge limit. But with both options on, the machine would seem to stop at the battery limit for a short (1-2 hours?) period of time, but then charge itself awkwardly slow, trickling up to being 100%, eventually. It wasnāt a normal charge rate, even up towards the top end of charging a full battery, but an artificially slow limit ā As if it were attempting to listen to both āno more than 85% charge limitā and the rules set that battery extender has behind it.