Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. Cheers, Peter ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 00:06:40 -0700 Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. Should you also not be installing this header? Aren't these values used in the libinput public API towards the compositor? More importantly, aren't we using these values in the Wayland protocol already for wl_pointer buttons and wl_keyboard keycodes (which are usually just fed into libxkbcommon, true), and in the future for any other new device classes like gamepads, joysticks, tablets, ...? My real question is, what should other OSs use as the codes in the above cases? Is it ok to have the Wayland input protocol or libinput API OS-specific? The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? Thanks, pq ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 10:21:07AM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote: On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 00:06:40 -0700 Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. Should you also not be installing this header? Aren't these values used in the libinput public API towards the compositor? Note that this header is put there to avoid having to add macros identical to the ones in linux/input.h depending on what linux header version is installed. The macros in question is only needed by evdev.c to sort out button and key events. More importantly, aren't we using these values in the Wayland protocol already for wl_pointer buttons and wl_keyboard keycodes (which are usually just fed into libxkbcommon, true), and in the future for any other new device classes like gamepads, joysticks, tablets, ...? Yes, all keyboard and button events in wl_pointer and wl_keyboard values from linux/input.h. Its probably the easiest to just continue that trend with the other input interfaces as well. My real question is, what should other OSs use as the codes in the above cases? Is it ok to have the Wayland input protocol or libinput API OS-specific? If we want the Wayland input protocol to be the same across platforms, then other platforms need to use the same values as evdev currently does. It would probably be possible to use OS specific numbers there, but that will just result in more porting work in the toolkits and clients. How does it look there right now, regarding key codes, button codes etc? The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? libinput is more or less as portable as libwayland-* as it is now. The API is ment to use the same button/key identifiers as Wayland (i.e. evdev as it is now), so I think libinput can just follow what Wayland decides to do regarding those numbers. It should not be that much work to add backends for other OSes to libinput as there is already a split between the frontend and backends. Implement a separate libinput doesn't sound like the better way to me. The other part that would need bo be ported is, as with libwayland-*, to replace the usage of epoll. Jonas Thanks, pq ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On 3/06/2014 17:21 , Pekka Paalanen wrote: On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 00:06:40 -0700 Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. Should you also not be installing this header? Aren't these values used in the libinput public API towards the compositor? no, and yes. I'd rather not install a header that really belongs to some other project. IMO if a compositor on e.g. BSD wants to use this, they can include linux/input.h as well and decide how, when, etc to install it. to give you a bad analogy: if we return M_PI we don't provide and install math.h ourselves either. More importantly, aren't we using these values in the Wayland protocol already for wl_pointer buttons and wl_keyboard keycodes (which are usually just fed into libxkbcommon, true), and in the future for any other new device classes like gamepads, joysticks, tablets, ...? My real question is, what should other OSs use as the codes in the above cases? Is it ok to have the Wayland input protocol or libinput API OS-specific? If we want to *look* OS-independent we could just do this: #define LIBINPUT_KEY_A KEY_A and then export the LIBINPUT* constants. this is obviously just pretending to be non-OS-specific so we might as well cut out the middle man and say: buttons/keys use linux/input.h constants. The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? No, other OS can use libinput, they just need to get evdev into the kernel :) BSD is already working on this, there's probably options for having a shim between the kernel and userspace but at that point you're probably better off doing it in the kernel directly. Cheers, Peter ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On 3/06/2014 17:06 , Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. what's the technical benefit of that though? Cheers, Peter ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
I think it should be #include linux/input.h at the very least. a_header_file.h has always meant system library to me. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net wrote: On 3/06/2014 17:06 , Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. what's the technical benefit of that though? Cheers, Peter ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel -- Jasper ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:54:38, Jasper St. Pierre escreveu: I think it should be #include linux/input.h at the very least. a_header_file.h has always meant system library to me. That distinction is blurred when you have third-party libraries. is actually meant for headers in my project because it starts the search from $PWD, whereas starts in the system dirs, if no -I flag is passed. If they are, things change. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 19:32:06, Peter Hutterer escreveu: The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? No, other OS can use libinput, they just need to get evdev into the kernel BSD is already working on this, there's probably options for having a shim between the kernel and userspace but at that point you're probably better off doing it in the kernel directly. Let me extend the question: what happens if one such OS decides to add another constant for something that Linux doesn't have yet. Who decides the value? Should we have H. Peter Anvin resurrect the LANANA so we can have a central registry of codes? Should BSD kernel developers submit Linux kernel patches? Should it be first come, first serve? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
Just have people shoot an email saying hey, we'd like to add a constant for this. Talking to each other is really all we need to do, no need to make it any more formal. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 19:32:06, Peter Hutterer escreveu: The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? No, other OS can use libinput, they just need to get evdev into the kernel BSD is already working on this, there's probably options for having a shim between the kernel and userspace but at that point you're probably better off doing it in the kernel directly. Let me extend the question: what happens if one such OS decides to add another constant for something that Linux doesn't have yet. Who decides the value? Should we have H. Peter Anvin resurrect the LANANA so we can have a central registry of codes? Should BSD kernel developers submit Linux kernel patches? Should it be first come, first serve? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel -- Jasper ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 08:54:38AM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: I think it should be #include linux/input.h at the very least. a_header_file.h has always meant system library to me. amended locally, thanks. Cheers, Peter On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net wrote: On 3/06/2014 17:06 , Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 16:56:35, Peter Hutterer escreveu: On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? does it matter much? #include linux/input.h makes it clear which header it is, that we ship our own doesn't really change that. I think we should start moving away from a linux/ header. If Wayland gets run on other OS, this header would mean it happens to be the same values, but it's not really a Linux header. what's the technical benefit of that though? Cheers, Peter ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:23:07AM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: Just have people shoot an email saying hey, we'd like to add a constant for this. Talking to each other is really all we need to do, no need to make it any more formal. indeed. and there's a high chance that if another OS needs a new code, the Linux kernel will need that code too. There's always the option of having vendor-defined codes starting from e.g. 0xFF00 but I'd really really like to avoid going there until there is no other option. Cheers, Peter On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Thiago Macieira thi...@kde.org wrote: Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 19:32:06, Peter Hutterer escreveu: The current situation is vague, and this patch probably is not intended to fix that at all, but is there a plan? Or is it expected that other OSs implement their own libinput or something? No, other OS can use libinput, they just need to get evdev into the kernel BSD is already working on this, there's probably options for having a shim between the kernel and userspace but at that point you're probably better off doing it in the kernel directly. Let me extend the question: what happens if one such OS decides to add another constant for something that Linux doesn't have yet. Who decides the value? Should we have H. Peter Anvin resurrect the LANANA so we can have a central registry of codes? Should BSD kernel developers submit Linux kernel patches? Should it be first come, first serve? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
Re: [PATCH libinput] Add our own version of linux/input.h
Em ter 03 jun 2014, às 08:08:15, Peter Hutterer escreveu: Avoids having to #define any values we're trying to use. Header file is from Linux 3.15-rc8. Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net Wouldn't this be time as well to start using a different include than linux/input.h? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 ___ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
