Hi Thomas. > > > > > >> + WREG_SEQ(0x01, seq1); > >> + > >> + memctl = RREG32(MGAREG_MEMCTL); > >> + > >> + memctl |= RESET_FLAG; > >> + WREG32(MGAREG_MEMCTL, memctl); > >> + > >> + udelay(1000); > >> + > >> + memctl &= ~RESET_FLAG; > >> + WREG32(MGAREG_MEMCTL, memctl); > >> + > >> + /* screen on */ > >> + RREG_SEQ(0x01, seq1); > >> + seq1 &= ~0x20; > >> + WREG_SEQ(0x01, seq1); > > Here seq1 is read again, the old code used the old value. > > I think new code is better. > > You mean 'the old code was better,' right? Well, if there is no good reason to change it stick with the old code we know works. I was not sure what would happen with the register when reset was performed. So maybe reading back would be better, hence my comment. But re-using the old value gives full control of the register. So yeah, old code was better. Sam _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
