Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] xen/input: add multi-touch support | From | Oleksandr Andrushchenko <> | Date | Fri, 30 Jun 2017 10:41:08 +0300 |
| |
Hi, Dmitry!
On 06/29/2017 10:24 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On June 29, 2017 11:40:30 AM PDT, Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, Dmitry! >> >> First of all thank you for both the comments and the patch >> >> On 06/29/2017 11:17 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> Hi Oleksandr, >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 09:09:55AM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko >> wrote: >>>> + switch (event->mtouch.event_type) { >>>> + case XENKBD_MT_EV_DOWN: >>>> + input_mt_report_slot_state(dev, MT_TOOL_FINGER, >>>> + true); >>>> + input_event(dev, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_POSITION_X, >>>> + event->mtouch.u.pos.abs_x); >>>> + input_event(dev, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, >>>> + event->mtouch.u.pos.abs_y); >>>> + input_event(dev, EV_ABS, ABS_X, >>>> + event->mtouch.u.pos.abs_x); >>>> + input_event(dev, EV_ABS, ABS_Y, >>>> + event->mtouch.u.pos.abs_y); >>> I was looking at this and realized that this breaks the single touch >>> emulation for MT interface: for ST you are supposed to report the >> oldest >>> contact, here you report data for all of them. Luckily >>> input_mt_report_pointer_emulation() that is called as part of >>> input_mt_sync_frame() reports the correct ABS_X/ABS_Y data and fixes >>> that for you. >>> >>> We should simply remove reporting ABS_X/ABS_Y here and in >>> XENKBD_MT_EV_MOTION as well. >>> >>>> + >>>> + input_set_capability(mtouch, EV_KEY, BTN_TOUCH); >>>> + input_set_abs_params(mtouch, ABS_X, >>>> + 0, width, 0, 0); >>>> + input_set_abs_params(mtouch, ABS_Y, >>>> + 0, height, 0, 0); >>>> + input_set_abs_params(mtouch, ABS_PRESSURE, >>>> + 0, 255, 0, 0); >>> This is done automatically by input_mt_init_slots() when called with >>> INPUT_MT_DIRECT (as in your case) or INPUT_MT_POINTER, so this can be >>> removed as well. >> Great, I was not actually convinced that ABS is really needed >> to be put here while dealing with MT devices, >> so the above can be removed >>> Does the patch below (on top of yours) work for you? >> Unfortunately I didn't have time to test the patch today, but will try >> to do so tomorrow. >> >> Beside that, do you think that the removals above should go into my >> patch >> and the rest of yours (it looks like needed refactoring to me) should >> go >> into >> a separate one, not named "MT support fixups", but rather "Xen input >> driver refactoring"? Because part of the changes seems to be MT >> relevant >> and part is pure refactoring. >> If so, do you want me to rework your patch with these changes and add >> on >> top of mine (I will put your signed off) or you will handle it on your >> own? > I was planning on simply folding my changes into your patch and calling it a day, unless your testing would show there is an issue. I found no issue with the patches, but I have only tested that on ARM with our new kbd/ptr/mt backend [1]. I am not able to test that on x86 unfortunately, thus cannot confirm QEMU's backend is ok as well. What will be the next steps on my side to get MT in? > It wasn't intended to be a separate patch in it's own right, I simply sent it out this way to show what exactly I was changing. > > > Thanks. > Thank you, Oleksandr
[1] https://github.com/xen-troops/displ_be
| |