Am 2022-02-04 13:55, schrieb Jan Kiszka:
On 02.02.22 10:57, Jan Kiszka wrote:
..
What about also exposing a "is_unlocked" service? Seems that would have the semantic we need, and there is at least already stm_is_unlocked_sr.But no sst26_is_unlocked.From my reading of sst26_is_locked, it has "is fully unlocked" semantic,rather than "is fully locked". Looks inconsistent today, right?
Couldn't wrap my head around that code, but I wouldn't be suprised if it is. -michael
