linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Should we create a raw input interface for IR's ? - Was: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] lirc core device driver infrastructure

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]

Message-ID: <20091127043318.GK6936@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date:	Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:33:18 -0800
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Cc:	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...sonet.com>,
	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mario Limonciello <superm1@...ntu.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>,
	Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Should we create a raw input interface for IR's ? - Was:
	Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] lirc core device driver infrastructure

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:08:29PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod@...sonet.com> wrote:
> >> No, at present we expect 1:1 button->event mapping leaving macro
> >> expansion (i.e. KEY_PROG1 ->  "do some multi-step sequence" to
> >> userspace).
> >
> > Hm. So ctrl-x, alt-tab, etc. would have to be faked in userspace somehow.
> > Bummer.
> 
> That is scripting. Scripting always needs to be done in user space.
> 
> In the code I posted there is one evdev device for each configured
> remote. Mapped single keycodes are presented on these devices for each
> IR burst. There is no device for the IR receiver.  A LIRC type process
> could watch these devices and then execute scripts based on the
> keycodes reported.
> 
> The configfs model is very flexible. You could make a "remote" that
> translates the UP/DOWN buttons of several different remotes into
> KEY_UP/DOWN.  That lets several different remotes control the same
> app.
> 
> Sure it is clunky to play with IR hex codes and keycodes in the
> configfs mapping dir. If you don't like it write a GUI app for
> manipulating the codes. GUI would then generate a script for udev to
> run which builds the configfs entries.
> 
> Maybe I should rename those directory entries to "app" instead of
> "remote". They contain the mappings from IR hex codes to keycodes that
> an app is interested in. Usually there is a 1:1 correspondence between
> remote and app but there doesn't have to be.
> 

Maybe we should revisit Jon's patchset as well. Regretfully I did not
have time to do that when it was submitted the last time.

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/