public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
@ 2003-06-16 17:41 Harald Dunkel
  2003-06-16 18:39 ` ismail (cartman) donmez
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Harald Dunkel @ 2003-06-16 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi folks,

I haven't played with 2.5.x kernels for quite some time, so
maybe I missed something, but shouldn't there be a penguin
logo at boot time? AFAICT I have enabled vesa framebuffer,
fbconsole, and a 224 colors boot logo. The first few lines
are not scrolled at boot time, but Tux is gone.

On kernel 2.4.21 Tux is back.


Regards

Harri


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-06-16 17:41 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo? Harald Dunkel
@ 2003-06-16 18:39 ` ismail (cartman) donmez
  2003-06-16 18:53   ` Flameeyes
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: ismail (cartman) donmez @ 2003-06-16 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Harald Dunkel, linux-kernel

Hi,
> I haven't played with 2.5.x kernels for quite some time, so
> maybe I missed something, but shouldn't there be a penguin
> logo at boot time? AFAICT I have enabled vesa framebuffer,
> fbconsole, and a 224 colors boot logo. The first few lines
> are not scrolled at boot time, but Tux is gone.
>
Try  Graphics support  --->Logo configuration  --->[*] Bootup logo

Regards,
/ismail

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-06-16 18:39 ` ismail (cartman) donmez
@ 2003-06-16 18:53   ` Flameeyes
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Flameeyes @ 2003-06-16 18:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 20:39, ismail (cartman) donmez wrote:
> Try  Graphics support  --->Logo configuration  --->[*] Bootup logo
You can't activate the 224 colors logo without Bootup Logo active.
I have the same problem with these lines in .config

CONFIG_LOGO=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_MONO=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_VGA16=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_CLUT224=y

-- 
Flameeyes


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
@ 2003-06-16 19:35 Petr Vandrovec
  2003-06-16 20:36 ` James Simmons
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vandrovec @ 2003-06-16 19:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Flameeyes; +Cc: linux-kernel

On 16 Jun 03 at 20:53, Flameeyes wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 20:39, ismail (cartman) donmez wrote:
> > Try  Graphics support  --->Logo configuration  --->[*] Bootup logo
> You can't activate the 224 colors logo without Bootup Logo active.
> I have the same problem with these lines in .config
> 
> CONFIG_LOGO=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_MONO=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_VGA16=y
> CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_CLUT224=y

It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.

At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should 
not matter, yes?
                                        Petr Vandrovec


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-06-16 19:35 Petr Vandrovec
@ 2003-06-16 20:36 ` James Simmons
  2003-06-17 18:06   ` Harald Dunkel
  2003-07-05 15:14   ` Harald Dunkel
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: James Simmons @ 2003-06-16 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Petr Vandrovec; +Cc: Flameeyes, linux-kernel


> It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.
> 
> At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
> yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
> is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should 
> not matter, yes?

Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test 

} else if (image->depth == bpp)

Its should be 

} else if (image->depth <= bpp)

instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth 
matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of 
equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-06-16 20:36 ` James Simmons
@ 2003-06-17 18:06   ` Harald Dunkel
  2003-07-05 15:14   ` Harald Dunkel
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Harald Dunkel @ 2003-06-17 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Simmons; +Cc: Petr Vandrovec, Flameeyes, linux-kernel

James Simmons wrote:
> 
> Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test 
> 
> } else if (image->depth == bpp)
> 
> Its should be 
> 
> } else if (image->depth <= bpp)
> 
> instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth 
> matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of 
> equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.
> 

Tux is back.


Many thanx

Harri


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-06-16 20:36 ` James Simmons
  2003-06-17 18:06   ` Harald Dunkel
@ 2003-07-05 15:14   ` Harald Dunkel
  2003-07-05 15:53     ` Alex Goddard
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Harald Dunkel @ 2003-07-05 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: James Simmons, Petr Vandrovec, Flameeyes

Hi folks,

James Simmons wrote:
>>It is probably some uninitialized value or something like that.
>>
>>At work I have no logo, while at home I have logo (both 2.5.71 from
>>yesterday), both with matroxfb... Only significant difference I know
>>is that at home I have UP kernel, while at work I have SMP. But it should 
>>not matter, yes?
> 
> 
> Its a bug in cfbimgblt.c. In cfb_imageblit you have a test 
> 
> } else if (image->depth == bpp)
> 
> Its should be 
> 
> } else if (image->depth <= bpp)
> 
> instead. At present the logo will only show up when the framebuffer depth 
> matches the image's depth. cfb_imageblit supports displaying images of 
> equal or lesser depths than the framebuffer.
> 

Would it be possible to include this change in the official
source tree?


Regards

Harri


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo?
  2003-07-05 15:14   ` Harald Dunkel
@ 2003-07-05 15:53     ` Alex Goddard
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Alex Goddard @ 2003-07-05 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Harald Dunkel; +Cc: linux-kernel, James Simmons, Petr Vandrovec, Flameeyes

On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Harald Dunkel wrote:

[Boot Logo Stuff]

> Would it be possible to include this change in the official
> source tree?

This paticular change (and several) others are in a set of fb updates that 
James posted a day or three ago.  It's kind of out of his hands now.  I'm 
sure they'll get in eventually.

You can search your friendly, neighborhood lkml archive for the post with 
the newest fb patch's URL.

-- 
Alex Goddard
agoddard@purdue.edu

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-07-05 15:34 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-06-16 17:41 2.5.71, fbconsole: No boot logo? Harald Dunkel
2003-06-16 18:39 ` ismail (cartman) donmez
2003-06-16 18:53   ` Flameeyes
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-06-16 19:35 Petr Vandrovec
2003-06-16 20:36 ` James Simmons
2003-06-17 18:06   ` Harald Dunkel
2003-07-05 15:14   ` Harald Dunkel
2003-07-05 15:53     ` Alex Goddard

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox