*googles briefly for rfkill-input, looks for his brown paper bag* On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:12, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Hi Zephaniah, > > > > > > On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: > > > > EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten > > > > multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events > > > > straight from the event device while xf86-input-evdev is getting events > > > > from the same device. > > > > > > > > Here is the least invasive patch I could think of, it changes the > > > > behavior of EVIOCGRAB in some cases, specificly behavior is identical if > > > > the argument is 0 or 1, however if the argument is true and != 1, then > > > > it does a 'non exclusive grab', a better name might be handy. > > > > > > > > What this does is allow the events to go to everything that's using > > > > evdev to get events, but grabs it from anything else. About as close to > > > > what people want as I can get, and fairly non-invasive. > > > > > > Unfortunately this also robs non-legacy input handlers (such as > > > rfkill-input) of input events. Does xf86-input-evdev really needs to > > > grab devices exclusively? I guess we can't abandon the standard > > > keyboard driver until X supports hotplugging. How close is it to > > > support devices coming and going? > > > > Er, to explain. > > > > The current EVIOCGRAB does an exclusive grab that prohibits rfkill-input > > and friends from working. > > > > I understand that. > > > As it is the only way to disable the legacy input handlers, > > xf86-input-evdev has been using it since we added it. > > > > Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the > device at all.
We have to disable the legacy input handlers somehow, not doing so
simply isn't an option.
>
> > The patch is to let us cause only things that use /dev/input/event<n> to
> > get events, thus, a non-exclusive grab.
> >
> > This basicly disables the legacy input handlers, and it's the least
> > invasive patch I could think of.
> >
>
> But rfkill-input is not a legacy handler. My objection is that with your
> solution you still will rob handlers such rfkill-input of events.
Urgh.
So, any thoughts on how to identify legacy input handlers in the input
system?
This is a tricky case I had not even been aware of.
>
> > Going for a separate ioctl would also work, but in some ways it would
> > make supporting it more of a pain.
> >
> > I don't care _that_ much either way, as long as we can get a way to
> > disable the legacy events while allowing other things to get the events
> > too.
> >
> > Zephaniah E. Hull.
> > >
> > > If we can't remain as is until X hotplug is ready then I'd rather had
> > > a separate ioctl that disables legacy input handlers (keyboard, mousedev)
> > > for a given input device.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dmitry
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Dmitry
>
--
1024D/E65A7801 Zephaniah E. Hull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
92ED 94E4 B1E6 3624 226D 5727 4453 008B E65A 7801
CCs of replies from mailing lists are requested.
>> kinds of numbers the tobacco industry wishes it had, and Dell is very
>> very happy with the results.
>
>Do they come with a Surgeon General warning on the box?
The new ones have "Designed for Windows XP". Yes.
-- Satya, Paul Martin, and Derek Balling in the Scary Devil Monastery.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
