Re: keyboard problem with 2.6.6

From: John Bradford
Date: Tue Jun 01 2004 - 09:03:48 EST


Quote from Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>:
> Hi!
>
> > >>>>> "Giuseppe" == Giuseppe Bilotta <bilotta78@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > Giuseppe> So, while we wait for complete support, at the kernel
> > Giuseppe> level, for all the multimedia keyboards supported by X,
> > Giuseppe> we *need* proper raw mode.
> >
> > My question is: why do everything inside the kernel?
> >
> >
> > Even 'khttpd' has been removed from the kernel, because the same
> > efficiency has been achieved in the *userland* apache module. Why is
> > the input layer moving _backwards_?
> >
> > I don't think converting between keyboard/mouse protocols and the
> > input system's "struct input_event" has a tighter real-time
> > requirement than a heavily loaded web server. How many keys per
> > second can you type at? (Even if you type extremely fast and the
> > hardware constraints (velocity, etc.) are not reached yet, there is
> > still a limit that the keyboard controller, e.g. i8042, cannot
> > exceed.) How many mouse movements are you making per second? Is a
> > userland driver unable to handle that data rate? (I don't think so.
> > I believe enve a 386-DX 33MHz can handle it with ease.) If not, then
> > please do it in userland, so as not to waste kernel memory (which is
> > *NON-swappable*).
>
> It would be nice to have keyboard in kernel because that means
> keyboard works even on heavilly overloaded system, in case of oops
> etc. (Unfortunately steps back were already taken; console switching
> is no longer so robust w.r.t. kernel crashes :-( ).

I think it's nice to have input handling for the _console_ in the kernel
for the above reasons. In most cases a PS/2 keyboard and mouse are the
console input devices, but where they aren't, userspace processing might
be more logical.

I think that Vojtech mentioned at some time that the in-kernel PS/2 emulation
was mostly a workaround for X until X was capable of accessing the keyboard
directly. Well, I would take this one stage further and say that the way I
see it, in normal use, an X-based system shouldn't need a console configured
in the kernel at all.

Of course, I probably wouldn't use a system like that, it wouldn't be likely
to interest me at all, but I can see that it might suit normal desktop
machines quite well.

So, in my opinion, it's all about X, and nothing about the kernel.

However, I don't even have much interest in X itself these days, prefering
to work on the console :-).

John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/