Message-ID: <20120222152425.GA29436@polaris.bitmath.org>
Date:	Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:24:25 +0100
From:	"Henrik Rydberg" <rydberg@...omail.se>
To:	Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>
Cc:	Chung-yih Wang <cywang@...omium.org>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...vis.unipv.it>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CHROMIUM: Input: synaptics - filter out the events with
 low z values

> > I see the problem. However, ignoring it will just move the problem
> > forward to another bug report, will it not?  Hysteresis is a slam dunk
> > here.  In addition, since the low-pressure state is bound to be
> > transitional (soon to be followed by a real num_fingers==1 package),
> > simply skipping such packages might be a better option.
> 
> In practice, we don't actually see the profile sensor pad sending one
> low-z finger, and one high-z finger.  In the case where one finger is
> solidly on the pad, and another finger is hovering, lifting, or
> alighting, the pad sends 2 high-z fingers, with one of them having a
> completely wrong x or y coordinate.

Urgh.

> The two reported z-values are
> nearly, but not exactly, identical.  I can't think of good fix for
> this, other than adding finger tracking and filtering out via
> 'moved-too-far-too-fast', where possible, and I'd prefer that this be
> handled in userspace.

It sounds like the z value in the second packet carries zero
information. If that were true, the fact that the patch is effective
suggests the semi-mt slot reporting could follow BTN_TOUCH, more or
less.  In doing so, you would also obtain hysteresis automatically.

> The 1-low-z && 1-high-z case that we are
> discussing here isn't actually ever triggered; either both fingers are
> high-z, or neither are.

I suspect it depends a bit on the values of low-z and hi-z,
respectively? Otherwise, there really is no information in that extra
packet.

> The real usefulness of this patch is filtering out the 1-low-z-finger
> and 2-low-z fingers cases.
> 
> As for the hypothetical 1-finger-hi, 1-finger-low case, which I asked
> Chung-yih to add because it seemed like a good idea in theory...
> 
> Yes, I think you have a good point.  Thanks to evdev's stateful
> nature, simply skipping the (1-strong,1-weak) packet might actually
> work better than forcing num_fingers == 0.
> 
> For cases where a second finger is temporarily reporting low-z because
> it is arriving or leaving, evdev would just lock the (1 or 2 initial)
> fingers in their current position until the transition is over, and
> then start reporting the new number of fingers at their new positions.
> 
> For cases where there is one high-z finger, and a hovering thumb or
> palm triggers 2-finger reporting temporarily (without ever going above
> the threshold), the original finger will get frozen in its current
> position until the hovering finger is no longer detected, and then
> snap to its new position.  This might cause strange sudden jumps, but
> that seems unavoidable.

A lot of things seem unavoidable with this hardware. :-)

> I'm not sure hysteresis is a "slam dunk"...  in fact, I don't see how
> it would help much.  But, it is hard to argue against adding the
> functionality, since the hysteresis window can be made arbitrarily
> small.  Perhaps if you are inclined, you can elaborate on why you
> think it is important.

The most striking effect is the ability to better retain a
drag. Although the statement was made in light of possible
(1-strong,1-weak) packets, it should help in the 2-weak case too.

Thanks,
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists