Since `+' has a higher precedence than the trinary operator `?', this
added `hres * (1 << color_mode)' to the boolean, testing videomode
and depth.

Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <redacted>
---
Sorry for the dup. this title and changelog should be better.

quoted

The idea is that the framebuffer is offset by 0x1020 normally, except
when the video mode is VMODE_832_624_75 and the depth > 8 in which case
it's offet by 0x1010. It's a weird piece of HW but I think the original
code is correct. Or do I miss something ?

Thanks for this, let's simplify to explain what I think that goes wrong:

printf("%d\n", 1 + 0 ? 2 : 4);

This prints `2': since the `+' operator has a higher precedence than the
trinary `?' operator.

In the original code we had:

return vmode_attrs[video_mode-1].vres *
  	       (vmode_attrs[video_mode-1].hres * (1<<color_mode) +
  		((video_mode == VMODE_832_624_75) &&
		 (color_mode > CMODE_8)) ? 0x10 : 0x20) + 0x1000;

note that `hres * (1 << color_mode)' is added to
((video_mode == VMODE_832_624_75) && (color_mode > CMODE_8))
before the trinary operator `?' occurs.

So maybe instead of the first patch you may want to apply this?

diff --git a/drivers/video/platinumfb.c b/drivers/video/platinumfb.c
index 03b3670..2cc986f 100644
--- a/drivers/video/platinumfb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/platinumfb.c

@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static inline int platinum_vram_reqd(int video_mode, int color_mode)
 	return vmode_attrs[video_mode-1].vres *
 	       (vmode_attrs[video_mode-1].hres * (1<<color_mode) +
 		((video_mode == VMODE_832_624_75) &&
-		 (color_mode > CMODE_8)) ? 0x10 : 0x20) + 0x1000;
+		 (color_mode > CMODE_8) ? 0x1010 : 0x1020));