From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDEBEC77B6C for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 21:53:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229782AbjDLVx3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:53:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47636 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229451AbjDLVx1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:53:27 -0400 Received: from mailbackend.panix.com (mailbackend.panix.com [166.84.1.89]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA64AE48 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 14:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.panix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4Pxc0P3wRHz2kKb; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:53:25 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=panix.com; s=panix; t=1681336405; bh=bEXG3RlzB+cCgvd7LZLlacWwHWawjB5ycq4sdxN137E=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:From:To:Cc; b=AmffuYjMweW4Hwcow0b5ZMkmQ0sdtAInS8YwixD+eXqQ+9FM710qxP0kBwC3Y3M20 nth+QPbjZcgtgXx7/bLJ+maIGp1A3BnZi0ZvElt0TChsgo/FoeDyrJQsDJoe3VDklH owGVM+rfTTbEESeQHDHcCjHgytsiJ9n0hiZlWkww= X-Panix-Received: from 166.84.1.2 (SquirrelMail authenticated user pa@panix.com) by mail.panix.com with HTTP; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:53:25 -0400 Message-ID: <40edb0fdb0eaff434f4872dd677923a6.squirrel@mail.panix.com> In-Reply-To: <87cz48srs4.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set> References: <20230412150225.3757223-1-javierm@redhat.com> <2e07f818ccdff7023a060e732d7c4ef6.squirrel@mail.panix.com> <87jzyhror0.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set> <1afd3044c2aca9322ecf304941c7df66.squirrel@mail.panix.com> <87fs94stgw.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set> <87cz48srs4.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:53:25 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware/sysfb: Fix wrong stride when bits-per-pixel is calculated From: "Pierre Asselin" To: "Javier Martinez Canillas" Cc: "Pierre Asselin" , "Jocelyn Falempe" , "Daniel Vetter" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, "Hans de Goede" , "Thomas Zimmermann" , "Ard Biesheuvel" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.23-p1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Javier Martinez Canillas writes: > > I still don't understand why this particular configuration didn't work... > > The framebuffer starts at 0xd8000000 and has a size of 0x240000 bytes, so Says who ? It's the same grub, same video mode as before the regression, so the size is probably 0x300000 like it always was. > a r8g8b8 pixel format with resolution 1024x768 should be correct. Since is > 1024 * 768 * (24 / 8) = 2359296 = 0x240000. That is internally consistent, but at variance with the video mode set up by grub. It is better to sqeeze bits by 4:3 on each line (regression) than to scatter 4 logical lines across 3 physical lines (regression, patched) ! > Could you please apply the following diff that will print all the relevant > fields from the screen_info that are used to calculate the bpp and stride. YES ! I can't peer into that struct screen_info and I don't know to write the printk's. (Hm, doesn't look too hard, but trust me, I would fumble it.) I'll back out the original patch first. Stand by. --PA