James Simmons wrote:
Lets look at the new code that I have done with your above parameters.
for (i = image->height; i--; ) {
shift = val = 0;
n = image->width;
dst = (u32 __iomem *) dst1;
while (n--) {
if (!s) { src++; s = 32; }
s -= 1;
color = (swapb32p(src) & (1 << s)) ? 1 : 0;
val |= color << shift;
/* Did the bitshift spill bits to the next long? */
if (shift >= 31) {
FB_WRITEL(val, dst++);
val = (shift == 31) ? 0 :(color >> (32 - shift));
}
shift += 1;
shift &= (32 - 1);
}
[ ...]
with 's' taking values from 31 to 0, and 'shift' taking values from 0 to
31. In the case of bits_per_pixel = 1 we have
s -= 1;
color = (swapb32p(src) & (1 << s)) ? 1 : 0;
val |= color << shift;
I suppose here that you meant 'swab32p' instead of 'swapb32p'. I can't
find any definition of 'swapb32p' and in your last patch you sent you
is using 'swab32p' which converts a 32-bits little endian word into a
32-bits big endian one.
which reduces to val = color;
I'm I seeing it wrong?
Well, I would say yes you are. If src = { 0xa3, 0x30, 0xef, 0x72 ...}
swab32p(src) -> 0x72ef30a3 -> 01110010 11101111 00110000 10100011
during loop #1 (s=31, shift=0):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<31) ? 1 : 0; color is 0
val |= 0 << 0; val is 0
during loop #2 (s=30, shift=1):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<30) ? 1 : 0; color is 1
val |= 1 << 1; val is 2
during loop #3 (s=29, shift=2):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<29) ? 1 : 0; color is 1
val |= 1 << 2; val is 6
during loop #4 (s=28, shift=3):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<28) ? 1 : 0; color is 1
val |= 1 << 3; val is 0xe
during loop #5 (s=27, shift=4):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<27) ? 1 : 0; color is 0
val |= 0 << 4; val is 0xe
during loop #6 (s=26, shift=5):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<26) ? 1 : 0; color is 0
val |= 0 << 5; val is 0xe
during loop #7 (s=25, shift=6):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<25) ? 1 : 0; color is 1
val |= 1 << 6; val is 0x4e
during loop #8 (s=24, shift=7):
color = 0x72ef30a3 & (1<<24) ? 1 : 0; color is 0
val |= 0 << 7; val is 0x4e
and so on...
Finally val -> 11000101 00001100 11110111 01001110 -> 0xc50cf74e
and FB_WRITEL(val, dst++) will write { 0x4e, 0xf7, 0x0c, 0xc5} into
the frame buffer.
Am I seeing it wrong ?
BTW what is your visual?
FYI, I give you all screen info, maybe something is miss-initialized...
static struct fb_fix_screeninfo t6963c_fb_fix __initdata = {
.id = DRIVER_NAME,
.type = FB_TYPE_PACKED_PIXELS,
.visual = FB_VISUAL_MONO01,
.accel = FB_ACCEL_NONE,
};
static struct fb_var_screeninfo t6963c_fb_var __initdata = {
.bits_per_pixel = 1,
.red = {0, 1, 0},
.green = {0, 1, 0},
.blue = {0, 1, 0},
.transp = {0, 0, 0},
.activate = FB_ACTIVATE_NOW,
.height = -1, /* height of picture in mm */
.width = -1, /* width of picture in mm */
.accel_flags = 0,
.vmode = FB_VMODE_NONINTERLACED,
};
Franck
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
