aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorIngo Brueckl <ib@wupperonline.de>2008-12-10 17:35:00 -0500
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2008-12-13 14:25:49 -0500
commit1c55f18717304100a5f624c923f7cb6511b4116d (patch)
tree41e299ad69bdd0cf3d8b5e0aef56559046844b2e
parentf75bc06e5d00a827d3ec5d57bbb5b73a4adec855 (diff)
console ASCII glyph 1:1 mapping
For the console, there is a 1:1 mapping of glyphs which cannot be found in the current font. This seems to be meant as a kind of 'emergency fallback' for fonts without unicode mapping which otherwise would display nothing readable on the screen. At the moment it affects all chars for which no substitution character is defined. In particular this means that for all chars (>= 128) where there is no iso88591-1/unicode character (e.g. control character area) you'll get the very strange 1:1 mapping of the (cp437) graphics card glyphs. I'm pretty sure that the 1:1 mapping should only affect strict ASCII code characters, i.e. chars < 128. The patch limits the mapping as it probably was meant anyway. Signed-off-by: Ingo Brueckl <ib@wupperonline.de> Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Egmont Koblinger <egmont@uhulinux.hu> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
-rw-r--r--drivers/char/vt.c2
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/char/vt.c b/drivers/char/vt.c
index a5af6072e2b3..008176edbd64 100644
--- a/drivers/char/vt.c
+++ b/drivers/char/vt.c
@@ -2274,7 +2274,7 @@ rescan_last_byte:
2274 continue; /* nothing to display */ 2274 continue; /* nothing to display */
2275 } 2275 }
2276 /* Glyph not found */ 2276 /* Glyph not found */
2277 if ((!(vc->vc_utf && !vc->vc_disp_ctrl) || c < 128) && !(c & ~charmask)) { 2277 if ((!(vc->vc_utf && !vc->vc_disp_ctrl) && c < 128) && !(c & ~charmask)) {
2278 /* In legacy mode use the glyph we get by a 1:1 mapping. 2278 /* In legacy mode use the glyph we get by a 1:1 mapping.
2279 This would make absolutely no sense with Unicode in mind, 2279 This would make absolutely no sense with Unicode in mind,
2280 but do this for ASCII characters since a font may lack 2280 but do this for ASCII characters since a font may lack