The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220614090537.15557-4-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
con_do_clear_unimap() currently decreases and increases refcount of old
dictionary in a back and forth fashion. This makes the code really hard
to follow. Decrease the refcount only if everything went well and we
really allocated a new one and decoupled from the old dictionary.
I sincerelly hope I did not make a mistake in this (ill) logic.
Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-33-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-30-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-29-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-28-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-27-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-26-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-25-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-24-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-23-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-22-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-21-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The function uses too vague variable names like i, j, k for iterators, p,
q, p1, p2 for pointers etc.
Rename all these, so that it is clear what is going on:
- dict: for dictionaries.
- d, r, g: for dir, row, glyph iterators -- these are unsigned now.
- dir, row: for directory and row pointers.
- glyph: for the glyph.
- and so on...
This is a lot of shuffling, but the result pays off, IMO.
Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-20-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The code currently does shift, OR, and AND logic directly in the code.
It is not much obvious what happens there. Therefore define four macros
for that purpose and use them in the code. We use GENMASK() so that it
is clear which bits serve what purpose:
- UNI_GLYPH: bits 0.. 5
- UNI_ROW: bits 6..10
- UNI_DIR: bits 11..31
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220607104946.18710-10-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
The constant 20 makes the font sum computation signed which can lead to
sign extensions and signed wraps. It's not much of a problem as we build
with -fno-strict-overflow. But if we ever decide not to, be ready, so
switch the constant to unsigned.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210105120239.28031-7-jslaby@suse.cz
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
GIO_UNIMAP can easily result in a high order allocation,
seen 6th order allocation on radeondrmfb:
fbcon: radeondrmfb (fb0) is primary device
Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 160x64
radeon 0000:01:05.0: fb0: radeondrmfb frame buffer device
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 78661 at mm/page_alloc.c:3532
__alloc_pages_nodemask+0x1b1/0x600
order 6 >= 3, gfp 0x40d0
The warning is generated by a debug patch.
At the same time it's safe to use kvmalloc() for allocation in
con_get_unimap(), so let's do the substitution.
And do the same for con_set_unimap().
Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
