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@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
