[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1JaGOQ-0003km-7S@be1.7eggert.dyndns.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:20:41 +0100
From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, "Fred ." <eldmannen@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Keys get stuck
Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 06:14:26PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> hw is proper place to implement autorepeat, and along with some
>> buffering, it has chance to work. Kernel is not real-time, and X are
>> definitely not real-time, while autorepeat is real-time operation.
>>
>> It actually mostly works in ps/2 case. Buffer in hardware means that
>> pretty big interrupt delays can be tolerated without problems.
>
> So does the keyboard events generate something like this then:
>
> KEY_x_DOWN
> KEY_x_REPEAT
> KEY_x_UP
>
> If so then X certainly could get all the keyboard information I imagine
> it needs from the kernel, but otherwise I am not sure how it could. A
> repeated series of key down events are not enough since some keys you
> don't want repeated you just want to know when the key is held down and
> when it isn't.
You just need a timestamp for each event, and you can get a timestamp for
each event (as far as I read in this thread). Using the current time while
processing the event is plain stupid.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists