Re: uniform input device packets?

Vojtech Pavlik (vojtech@twilight.ucw.cz)
Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:05:32 +0200


On Thu, Jun 25, 1998 at 06:06:17AM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> > On the other hand, both might work at once (and we could use
> > this for force-feedback, too). I think we should use separate event
> > types for leds, and motors and such, too, because these
> > simply are not keys, eventhough they're booleans and or
> > integers.
>
> i would not agree, to keep it simpler. the application should know, or it
> should be fetchable through ioctl/special events. What is absint#5
> please? "Speed of Motor XZ".

Well, okay. This can work too. So, for a standard keyboard, we have
101 booleans for keys and 3 booleans for leds?

> > If you used 3*, you'd use one byte more, but would have
> > 65535 axes as well, and won't have trouble reporting status
> > of a nuclear plant control panel ;)
> > Myself I think it is better to use more bytes than to use
> > more complex routines.
>
> I would tend to agree to a certain point. I'm using only whole number of
> nibbles in the protocol right now, just changed the relint/absint stuff to
> 16 indexes, 65536 values. Might go to the byte way tomorrow, who knows :-)

Okay. :)

Vojtech

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu