On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:55:26AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com writes:
snip
What's the status of this patch if I may ask?
1) It's unclear if this is the right solution. If key repeat is done in
the PS/2 controller, then that's where the logic here should
Hi,
On 04/19/13 06:44, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
key can be identified by guest.
This patch changed qemu to intervally send down events to guest
in
Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com writes:
Hi,
On 04/19/13 06:44, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
key can be identified by guest.
This patch changed qemu to
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:06:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
key can be identified by guest.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 03:32:52PM +0800, Amos Kong wrote:
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:06:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up
Il 22/04/2013 10:09, Amos Kong ha scritto:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 03:32:52PM +0800, Amos Kong wrote:
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:06:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:33:20 +0200
Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 22/04/2013 10:09, Amos Kong ha scritto:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 03:32:52PM +0800, Amos Kong wrote:
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:06:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu)
Il 22/04/2013 14:43, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto:
You're right. The typematic delay/rate is implemented within the i8042
keyboard microcontroller (QEMU does not implement that register).
It is possible that software ignores interrupts for a key that is
already down, and reimplements
Hi,
But isn't this patch the equivalent of repeatedly pressing and releasing a
key? Shouldn't this be implemented at a lower-level layer like the input
subsystem?
ps/2 keyboard emulation would probably the place to do it.
I'm pretty sure not all keyboard types have auto-repeat. The linux
Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com writes:
Il 22/04/2013 14:43, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto:
You're right. The typematic delay/rate is implemented within the i8042
keyboard microcontroller (QEMU does not implement that register).
It is possible that software ignores interrupts for a
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:02:41 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com writes:
Il 22/04/2013 14:43, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto:
You're right. The typematic delay/rate is implemented within the i8042
keyboard microcontroller (QEMU does not
Il 22/04/2013 15:35, Gerd Hoffmann ha scritto:
Hi,
But isn't this patch the equivalent of repeatedly pressing and releasing a
key? Shouldn't this be implemented at a lower-level layer like the input
subsystem?
ps/2 keyboard emulation would probably the place to do it.
Yes, if PS/2
Hi,
Yes, if PS/2 keyboard emulation emulated the autorepeat rate/delay, then
the code we have in QMP would just work. However it would need to be
done for all devices (ignoring repeated keydown events from the upper
layers, and creating its own repeated event). So it makes sense to have
Il 22/04/2013 17:20, Gerd Hoffmann ha scritto:
Yes, if PS/2 keyboard emulation emulated the autorepeat rate/delay, then
the code we have in QMP would just work. However it would need to be
done for all devices (ignoring repeated keydown events from the upper
layers, and creating its own
On 04/22/2013 01:32 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:06:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 09:02:41AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com writes:
Il 22/04/2013 14:43, Luiz Capitulino ha scritto:
You're right. The typematic delay/rate is implemented within the i8042
keyboard microcontroller (QEMU does not implement that
On 04/18/2013 10:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
key can be identified by guest.
This patch changed qemu to intervally send down events to guest
in
(qemu) sendkey a 1000
Current design is that qemu only send one down event to guest,
and delay sometime, then send one up event. In this case, only
key can be identified by guest.
This patch changed qemu to intervally send down events to guest
in the hold time, the interval is 100ms.
(qemu)
18 matches
Mail list logo
