On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 1:54 PM Frank Wunderlich <linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Am 29. Juli 2021 07:47:03 MESZ schrieb Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 1:40 PM Frank Wunderlich <linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>
> > struct mtk_mmsys_routes {
> > u32 from_comp;
> > u32 to_comp;
> > u32 addr;
> > + u32 mask;
> > u32 val;
> > };
> >mask is not the last element, and mmsys_mt8183_routing_table = {
> > {
> > DDP_COMPONENT_OVL0, DDP_COMPONENT_OVL_2L0,
> > MT8183_DISP_OVL0_MOUT_EN, MT8183_OVL0_MOUT_EN_OVL0_2L
> > }
> >...
> >so the mask and val will be wrong. CK, do you know what mask we should
> >set for mt8183? Or can we just set a dummy 0 mask.
>
> Ahhh...mt8183 has own mmsys-table and
> i had only changed the default one,so
> value is now missing because value is now the mask. I have used same order as
> CK to avoid confusion and make it easier
> to review.
> Afaik you could use same value as value to reset same bits...did this in default routing table too.
>
Should I create another patch based on this or can you help update the
mt8183 table in this patch?
Thanks
> regards Frank
