Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol (rev2)

[Ping Cheng]

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Peter Hutterer
<peter.hutterer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > And yes, you could add it once we find it's an issue, but by then someone
>> > has already spent time to work around this. And when you then start sending
>> > slot events all the time, you admit that writing the workaround was just a
>> > time waster :)
>>
>> Work around what, exactly?
>
> I was referring to having a protocol where processes has to ignore contacts
> already down until they've been there when a contact was pressed (and your
> comment that if this becomes an issue it could be added lateron).
> Now, the ignoring part needs to be written (this is the "workaround"
> referred to above). if you're planning to add it later, we need to cater for
> that part as well then, having two implementations depending on the kernel
> versions.
>
> but this is just for clarification, it's a moot point anyway given that
> button events have the same behaviour.

This topic is outside of the _MT_ protocol discussion.

However, it is indeed an issue with all filtered input events, both
for MT and regular ones.

I think we need to add an ioctl to enable user land driver/client to
signal the kernel driver to send all events without filtering, just
once. Hot-plugged devices and X driver starts after user has contacted
with the device are two examples that the client would miss filtered
events.

Dmitry, do you think it is a valid suggestion?

I've had this issue for ages (but never had time to work on it :(.

Ping
--
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/