linux-kernel - Re: Proposal: change keycode for scancode e0 32 from 150 to 172

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:25:34 +0200
From:	Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@....nl>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@...e.cz>,
	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: Proposal: change keycode for scancode e0 32 from 150 to 172

Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
>> In PS/2 mode it reports E0 32 which gets converted to keycode 150. In 
>> USB mode it reports E0 02 which gets converted to keycode 172.
>> I don't know if it's the keyboard itself that's being inconsistent, or 
>> if it is the table in usbkbd.c that's broken (in which case it should be 
>> fixed to be consistent with the keyboard in PS/2 mode.)
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> First, usbkbd.c has very probably zero business with this - the mappings 
> are being done in hid-input.c, usbkdb.c is only for embedded/debugging 
> cases, and is almost never used on modern systems (see the corresponding 
> Kconfig help text).
> 
>> You seem to be of the opinion that "usb behaviour is correct", but don't 
>> give any motivation why usb should take precedence.  Offhand, I would 
>> expect there to be fewer translation layers for PS/2 and would therefore 
>> assume PS/2 is more inherently correct.
> 
> For USB, we have Hid Usage Pages, which define this to be KEY_HOMEPAGE. 
> There is no such specification for PS/2 though, so what Hans is proposing 
> is to make it consistent with behavior of USB HID devices, which I agree 
> with.
> 

Good to hear, so as everyone smees to agree, shall I write a (massive, complex, 
intrusive) patch to fix this, or are there until now silent parties that object?

Regards,

Hans


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/