[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180102215437.i3x2j6jvxtac4ntt@pali>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 22:54:37 +0100
From: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
To: Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>
Cc: Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@...il.com>,
Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] input: Add disable sysfs entry for every input device
On Wednesday 04 January 2017 15:37:35 Bastien Nocera wrote:
> I don't doubt that the use cases should be catered for, I essentially
> did that same work without kernel changes for GNOME. What I doubt is
> the fuzzy semantics, the fact that the device is kept opened but no
> data is sent (that's not power saving), that whether users are revoked
> or should be revoked isn't clear, and that the goal is basically to
> work around stupid input handling when at the console. When running a
> display manager, this is all avoided.
>
> If this were to go through, then the semantics and behaviour needs to
> be better explained, power saving actually made possible, and make sure
> that libinput can proxy that state to the users on the console. Or an
> ioctl added to the evdev device to disable them.
So, do you mean to implement this "disable" action as ioctl for
particular /dev/input/event* device (instead of sysfs entry)?
--
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@...il.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists