[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAO-hwJJkyK_qPEL37QLd3kLuwB2rFBk+5FWg1UCfgr-FzxZ5aw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 09:40:17 +0200
From: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
To: Clément VUCHENER <clement.vuchener@...il.com>
Cc: Harry Cutts <hcutts@...omium.org>,
Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...-t.net>,
"open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nestor Lopez Casado <nlopezcasad@...itech.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] HID: logitech: Enable high-resolution scrolling on
Logitech mice
Hi Clément,
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 5:34 PM Clément VUCHENER
<clement.vuchener@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> I tried again to add hi-res wheel support for the G500 with Hans de
> Goede's latest patch series you've just merged in for-5.2/logitech, it
> is much better but there is still some issues.
>
> The first one is the device index, I need to use device index 0
> instead 0xff. I added a quick and dirty quirk (stealing in the
> QUIRK_CLASS range since the normal quirk range looks full) to change
> the device index assigned in __hidpp_send_report. After that the
> device is correctly initialized and the wheel multiplier is set.
Hmm, maybe we should restrain a little bit the reserved quirks...
But actually, .driver_data and .quirks are both unsigned long, so you
should be able to use the 64 bits.
>
> The second issue is that wheel values are not actually scaled
> according to the multiplier. I get 7/8 full scroll event for each
> wheel step. I think it happens because the mouse is split in two
> devices. The first device has the wheel events, and the second device
> has the HID++ reports. The wheel multiplier is only set on the second
> device (where the hi-res mode is enabled) and does not affect the
> wheel events from the first one.
I would think this have to do with the device not accepting the
command instead. Can you share some raw logs of the events (ideally
with hid-recorder from
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/libevdev/hid-tools)?
Cheers,
Benjamin
>
> Le mer. 19 déc. 2018 à 21:35, Benjamin Tissoires
> <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com> a écrit :
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:57 AM Clément VUCHENER
> > <clement.vuchener@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Le sam. 15 déc. 2018 à 15:45, Clément VUCHENER
> > > <clement.vuchener@...il.com> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 14 déc. 2018 à 19:37, Harry Cutts <hcutts@...omium.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Clement,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 05:47, Clément VUCHENER
> > > > > <clement.vuchener@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi, The G500s (and the G500 too, I think) does support the "scrolling
> > > > > > acceleration" bit. If I set it, I get around 8 events for each wheel
> > > > > > "click", this is what this driver expects, right? If I understood
> > > > > > correctly, I should try this patch with the
> > > > > > HIDPP_QUIRK_HI_RES_SCROLL_1P0 quirk set for my mouse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the info! Yes, that should work.
> > > >
> > > > Well, it is not that simple. I get "Device not connected" errors for
> > > > both interfaces of the mouse.
> > >
> > > I suspect the device is not responding because the hid device is not
> > > started. When is hid_hw_start supposed to be called? It is called
> > > early for HID_QUIRK_CLASS_G920 but later for other device. So the
> > > device is not started when hidpp_is_connected is called. Is this
> > > because most of the device in this driver are not real HID devices but
> > > DJ devices? How should non-DJ devices be treated?
> >
> > Hi Clement,
> >
> > I have a series I sent last September that allows to support non DJ
> > devices on logitech-hidpp
> > (https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-input/list/?series=16359).
> >
> > In its current form, with the latest upstream kernel, the series will
> > oops during the .event() callback, which is easy enough to fix.
> > However, I am currently trying to make it better as a second or third
> > reading made me realized that there was a bunch of non-sense in it and
> > a proper support would require slightly more work for the non unifying
> > receiver case.
> >
> > I hope I'll be able to send out something by the end of the week.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Benjamin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists