linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol (rev4)

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: <4BFABF40.30700@euromail.se>
Date:	Mon, 24 May 2010 20:02:40 +0200
From:	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>
To:	Ping Cheng <pinglinux@...il.com>
CC:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@...ia.com>,
	Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...-t.net>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <tissoire@...a.fr>,
	Stephane Chatty <chatty@...c.fr>,
	Rafi Rubin <rafi@...s.upenn.edu>,
	Michael Poole <mdpoole@...ilus.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol (rev4)

Ping Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se> wrote:
>> Ping Cheng wrote:
>>> What I am thinking is that we only need one SYN_ call for both _MT_
>>> and regular data combined, which is a call to input_sync() at the end
>>> of the whole packet. The SYN_MT_ can be replaced by the following
>>> example, which I think is more "client-friendly". This solution is
>>> based on the fact that the major difference between type A and type B
>>> is whether we need to filter the data or not:
>>>
>>> ABS_MT_RANDOM 0
>>> ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[0]
>>> ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[0]
>>> ABS_MT_ RANDOM 1
>>> ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[1]
>>> ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[1]
>>> SYN_REPORT
>>>
>>> input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_RANDOM, 0, 2, 0, 0);
>>>
>>> would tell the clients that they can expect two random touches.
>> And if you do s/RANDOM/SLOT/, you end up with what? ;-)
> 
> Haha, I know what you are thinking :).
> 
> Maybe I didn't make my point clear.  I didn't mean to make SLOT
> backward compatible.  I meant to replace SYN_MT_REPORT event with the
> ABS_MT_ RANDOM label so we only sync the whole packet once at the end.
> This way both types of MT_ data follow the same input event reporting
> flow....

You mean changing the type A protocol, breaking the current code base? That is a
big no-no.

> SLOT and RANDOM are both needed since they deal with two different
> types of MT data, filtered (type B) and unfiltered (type A). There is
> no midunderstanding there.
> 
> Ping

Henrik
--
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/