Re: [PATCH v6 03/16] power: sequencing: Add pwrseq_power_is_on()
Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]> Wed, 22 Jul 2026 03:03:08 -0700
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.driver-core,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-mediatek,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-usb |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMRc=MfZ1Yk6OJaCGphTYToMVfe_UU4dhOGmGVCbwqBV9S-a2g@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 11:01:20 +0200, Chen-Yu Tsai <[email protected]> said: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 5:08 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> > +/** >> > + * pwrseq_power_is_on() - Queries the last requested state of the power sequencer. >> > + * @desc: Descriptor referencing the power sequencer. >> > + * >> > + * This returns the last requested state of the power sequencer. >> > + * >> > + * Returns: >> > + * On success, 1 for on and 0 for off; negative error number on failure. >> > + */ >> > +int pwrseq_power_is_on(struct pwrseq_desc *desc) >> > +{ >> > + if (!desc) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + >> > + return desc->powered_on; >> > +} >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwrseq_power_is_on); >> > + >> >> Didn't we agree on introducing an enum to make it future-proof for when we >> also pull in pwrseq_is_controllable() from Loic? > > My bad. I misunderstood and thought it wasn't needed yet. It's not technically needed *yet* but since we know where we're going, it makes sense to be proactive. > >> I think this should work like so: >> >> enum { >> PWRSEQ_STATE_UNKNOWN, >> PWRSEQ_STATE_ON, >> PWRSEQ_STATE_OFF, >> }; >> >> int pwrseq_get_state(struct pwrseq_desc *desc) >> { > > I think you still want this here? > > if (!desc) > return -EINVAL; > > Yes. Bart