Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] vt: coherence validation code for the unicode screen buffer

From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Dave Mielke <Dave@mielke.cc>,
	Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] vt: coherence validation code for the unicode screen buffer
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:52:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <800831730e3aeaf4da23f7f97cfa80103236c3cb.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YSQ.7.76.1806182110450.16670@knanqh.ubzr>

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 21:50 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
[]
> > > +       /*
> > > +        * Make sure our unicode screen translates into the same glyphs
> > > +        * as the actual screen. This is brutal indeed.
> > > +        */
> > > +       p = (unsigned short *)vc->vc_origin;
> > > +       mask = vc->vc_hi_font_mask | 0xff;
> > > +       for (y = 0; y < vc->vc_rows; y++) {
> > > +               char32_t *line = uniscr->lines[y];
> > > +               for (x = 0; x < vc->vc_cols; x++) {
> > > +                       u16 glyph = scr_readw(p++) & mask;
> > > +                       char32_t uc = line[x];
> > > +                       int tc = conv_uni_to_pc(vc, uc);
> > > +                       if (tc == -4)
> > > +                               tc = conv_uni_to_pc(vc, 0xfffd);
> > > +                       if (tc == -4)
> > > +                               tc = conv_uni_to_pc(vc, '?');
> > > +                       if (tc != glyph)
> > > +                               pr_notice("%s: mismatch at %d,%d: "
> > > +                                         "glyph=%#x tc=%#x\n", __func__,
> > > +                                         x, y, glyph, tc);
> > 
> > Don't split format string in printk(). checkpatch will not warn on longer lines.
> 
> I didn't do it like that for checkpatch but to keep the code readable.
> I don't particularly care either ways though.

If one glyph is off, then perhaps others are off too.
Perhaps this message should be ratelimited.