Attention is currently required from: Jarried Lin, Yidi Lin, Yu-Ping Wu.
Chhao Chang has posted comments on this change by Jarried Lin. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025?usp=email )
Change subject: soc/mediatek/mt8196: Add unmask eint event for bootblock ......................................................................
Patch Set 17:
(3 comments)
File src/soc/mediatek/common/eint_event.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/3a222835_22f339dd?usp... : PS17, Line 15: uintptr_t reg;
What is your concern ?
i<<2 is the offset of the next group of registers, not the base. If you change it like this, it will change the semantics of i. For example: base 1000b000 → next group 1000b004
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/2a031081_6370e03e?usp... : PS17, Line 8: #define EVENT_CLEAN_MASK_OFFSET 0x880 : #define EVENT_MASK_OFFSET 0x800 : #define EINT_VALUE 0xFFFFFFFF : : void enable_eint_event(uintptr_t base, unsigned int port) : { : unsigned int i; : uintptr_t reg; : : for (i = 0; i < port; i++) { : reg = base + EVENT_CLEAN_MASK_OFFSET + (i << 2); : write32((uint32_t *)reg, EINT_VALUE); : } : }
It is not necessary to define a unused `EINT_BASE` for mt8196.
Since EINT_BASE is already used in eint_event.h, an error will occur if it is not defined.
File src/soc/mediatek/common/include/soc/eint_event.h:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/131a3684_8adeefc4?usp... : PS17, Line 17: struct eint_info { : uintptr_t base; : unsigned int eint_num; : };
Only MT8196 needs this struct.
As long as it is a mobile phone IC, this structure is needed