[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e8ea0c2e-445f-21e2-a248-3368f26bf391@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:20:03 +0100
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...il.com>,
Filipe Laíns <lains@...hlinux.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...hat.com>,
Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: logitech-dj: issue udev change event on device
connection
Hi,
On 3/18/20 6:15 PM, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 11:19 AM Filipe Laíns <lains@...hlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>> As discussed in the mailing list:
>>
>>> Right now the hid-logitech-dj driver will export one node for each
>>> connected device, even when the device is not connected. That causes
>>> some trouble because in userspace we don't have have any way to know if
>>> the device is connected or not, so when we try to communicate, if the
>>> device is disconnected it will fail.
>>
>> The solution reached to solve this issue is to trigger an udev change
>> event when the device connects, this way userspace can just wait on
>> those connections instead of trying to ping the device.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Filipe Laíns <lains@...hlinux.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
>> index 48dff5d6b605..fcd481a0be1f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
>> @@ -1464,6 +1464,8 @@ static int logi_dj_dj_event(struct hid_device *hdev,
>> if (dj_report->report_params[CONNECTION_STATUS_PARAM_STATUS] ==
>> STATUS_LINKLOSS) {
>> logi_dj_recv_forward_null_report(djrcv_dev, dj_report);
>> + } else {
>> + kobject_uevent(&hdev->dev.kobj, KOBJ_CHANGE);
>> }
>> break;
>> default:
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>
> The problem that will remain here is the transition period for
> userspace to start to rely upon
> this. It will have no idea whether the kernel is expected to send
> events or not. What do you
> think about adding a syfs attribute to indicate that events are being
> sent? Or something similar?
Then we would need to support that attribute forever. IMHO the best
option is to just make a uname call and check the kernel version, with
the code marked to be removed in the future when kernels older then
$version are no longer something we want to support.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists