Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Input: xen-kbdfront - allow better run-time configuration | From | Oleksandr Andrushchenko <> | Date | Thu, 26 Apr 2018 22:27:42 +0300 |
| |
On 04/26/2018 10:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:55:19AM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> On 04/23/2018 09:53 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:44:19PM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>> On 04/19/2018 02:25 PM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>> On 18/04/18 17:04, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> It is now only possible to control if multi-touch virtual device >>>>>> is created or not (via the corresponding XenStore entries), >>>>>> but keyboard and pointer devices are always created. >>>>> Why don't you want to go that route for keyboard and mouse, too? >>>>> Or does this really make no sense? >>>> Well, I would prefer not to touch anything outside Linux and >>>> this driver. And these settings seem to be implementation specific. >>>> So, this is why introduce Linux module parameters and don't extend >>>> the kbdif protocol. >>> Why do you consider this implementation specific? How other guests >>> decide to forego creation of relative pointer device or keyboard-like >>> device? >>> >>> You already have "features" for absolute pointing device and multitouch, >>> so please extend the protocol properly so you indeed do not code >>> something implementation-specific (i.e. module parameters). >> Ok, but in order to preserve the default behavior, e.g. >> pointer and keyboard devices are always created now, I'll have >> to have reverse features in the protocol: >> - feature-no-pointer >> - feature-no-keyboard >> The above may be set as a part of frontend's configuration and >> if missed are considered to be set to false. > I think you can have them as "feature-pointer" and "feature-keyboard" > (no negation), but assume not present considered enabled. I.e. > > kbd = xenbus_read_unsigned(..., XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_KEYBOARD, 1); > if (kbd) { > ... Thank you for your comments, could you please take a look at the patch [1] where I am trying to change the corresponding Xen protocol to fit the requirements? As we agreed I have to change the protocol first, so this patch is no longer valid > } > > Thanks. Thank you, Oleksandr [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-input/msg56094.html
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |