[M] Change in coreboot[main]: soc/mediatek/mt8196: Add unmask eint event for bootblock

[Yu-Ping Wu (Code Review)]

Attention is currently required from: Hung-Te Lin, Jarried Lin, Yidi Lin.

Yu-Ping Wu 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 14:

(3 comments)

File src/soc/mediatek/common/eint_event.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/7c122141_85b8bb1a?usp... :
PS14, Line 10: 0x880
If this is shared with mt8196, please add `#define EINT_EVENT_MASK_CLEAR_OFFSET 0x880` to eint_event.h.

File src/soc/mediatek/mt8196/eint_event.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/7c15af1d_d4e4cf5b?usp... :
PS14, Line 16: static void eint_clear_event_mask(uintptr_t base, unsigned int port_num)
This function looks quite similar to the common `unmask_eint_event_mask`. The `eint_event_mask_clr` array is of type u32, so `+ i * NEXT_ADDRESS` is equivalent to `eint_event_mask_clr[i]`.

Can we move this function to common code, and then the common `unmask_eint_event_mask` function can call this function, with `port_num` being `ARRAY_SIZE(mtk_eint_event->eint_event_mask_clr)`.

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84025/comment/28190ed6_8ad2a45a?usp... :
PS14, Line 26: 	eint_clear_event_mask(EINT_E_BASE, MAX_E);
Define an array of pairs `(base, port_num)` and use a for loop.