On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Olivier Fourdan <ofour...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Ping Cheng said the following on 10/09/2012 07:21 PM:
>>
>>
>> "builtin" == "tablet is integrated with the display" ==
>> INPUT_PROP_DIRECT (defined in the kernel)
>
> That's the other thread I started, indeed ("BuiltIn flag set automatically,
> but based on what?")I replied before I read through the message. You have a valid point. > Why is that different? 0x02 would be INPUT_PROP_BUTTONPAD according to > linux/input.h > > Why would that need to match the kernel definitions? Would DIRECT be more > explicit than e.g. INTEGRATED_WITH_DISPLAY? > > And what would be the kernel equivalent of ISD in terms of kernel then? As Jason pointed out, kernel INPUT_PROP_* is not enough to resolve our integrated/DISPLAY/SYSTEM issue. We need to update the code for it. And extra information is needed. > What I found for kernel is: > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.input/21661 > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.input/23241 > > But there's nothing about ISD (which is what the proposed patches are about > actually), so I am not sure I understand the need to follow the kernel > naming convention for libwacom. > > Corollary question, if ISD and screen tablet can be deduced from the device > properties in kernel, why do we need to have those in the database? Obviously there was a reason to have it in the database. We just forgot the reason ;). Ping ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Linuxwacom-devel mailing list Linuxwacom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxwacom-devel
