Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:

In summary,

While the current EVIO[G|S]KEYCODE works sub-optimally for scancodes up to 16 bytes
(since a read loop for 2^16 is not that expensive), the current approach
won't scale with bigger scancode spaces. So, it is needed expand it
to work with bigger scancode spaces, used by more recent IR protocols.

I'm afraid that any tricks we may try to go around the current limits to still
keep using the same ioctl definition will sooner or later cause big headaches.
The better is to redesign it to allow using different scancode spaces.


I second you: input layer events from drivers should be augmented with a protocol member, allowing us to define new ioctl and new ways to efficiently store and manage sparse scancode spaces (tree, hashtable ....). It will allow us to abstract the scancode value and to use variable length scancode depending on the used protocol, and using the most appropriate scheme to store the scancode/keycode mapping per protocol. The today scancode space will be the legacy one, the default if not specified "protocol". It will permit to progressively clean up the actual acceptable mess in the input layer and finally using real scancode -> keycode mappings everywhere if it is cleaner/convenient.

Best regards,
Emmanuel.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to