Re: [PATCH v3] power: sequencing: rename pwrseq_power_on/off() to pwrseq_enable/disable()

On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 03:42:18PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> The way power sequencing works means that a call to pwrseq_power_on()
> does not necessarily result in the pwrseq target being powered-on at
> that time: it may have already been powered on before. Similarly: a call
> to pwrseq_power_off() does not have to result in an actual powering off
> of resources: there may still be other users that requested a power-on
> before.
> 
> We will also introduce the concept of "non-controllable" pwrseq targets
> soon which further increases the disconnect between the naming
> convention and the actual semantics.
> 
> What consumers of pwrseq descriptors actually do is: they *vote* for a
> powering on of a given target or retract that vote. These operations
> could be called get/put in line with runtime PM but this could become
> confusing since we already provide pwrseq_get/put() for a different
> purpose. pwrseq_vote_on/off() also have been rejected as unusual in
> the tree.
> 
> Change the name of the two functions to pwrseq_enable/disable() which
> better reflects their purpose and semantics and also mirrors other
> enable-counted resources like regulators and clocks. No functional change
> intended.
> 
> If at any point users need to know *when* the exact power event happens,
> we can provide that information in the form of a notifier.
> 
> Acked-by: Jeff Johnson <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>

Acked-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]>

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்