Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
martin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > > > okay, i've now done so, and i now think i see what you mean about > >xset m 7/4 0 > > vs. > >xset m 7/4 1 > > ok - glad that I'm not so crazy ;-) > > > > i think setting acceleration to 7/4 as we're doing is a little > > aggressive, and i might choose a slightly smaller value (e.g., > > 165 or 160/100 instead of 175/100) -- this is just one guy's > > opinion. but i certainly agree now that the threshold arg should > > be '0'. > > Ok. How does t165/100 test? So far we have suggested tests: > > - spirals test > - using etoys / scratch this afternoon i was using spirals in Paint for low-speed maneuvering, and judging straight line performance by trying to get a quick sweep of the finger to move the cursor the whole way across the screen, but not more than that -- i.e., it shouldn't always get pinned to the edge of the screen, but often stop short. very subjective, i know. and, i was mostly testing without trying to force touchpad malfunction, for instance by letting another finger touch the pad. i'm still convinced that the new driver behavior is better than the old in the face of the touchpad malfunctioning -- and the xset tuning is really orthogonal to that in any case. paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > okay, i've now done so, and i now think i see what you mean about > xset m 7/4 0 > vs. > xset m 7/4 1 ok - glad that I'm not so crazy ;-) > i think setting acceleration to 7/4 as we're doing is a little > aggressive, and i might choose a slightly smaller value (e.g., > 165 or 160/100 instead of 175/100) -- this is just one guy's > opinion. but i certainly agree now that the threshold arg should > be '0'. Ok. How does t165/100 test? So far we have suggested tests: - spirals test - using etoys / scratch cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
martin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox wrote:
> > > According to the man page the 2nd parameter is the threshold at which
> > > the acceleration value is applied so I'm not surprised that you don't
> > > see any difference between 0 and 1. Even 4 might be hard to see. I
> > > think that to see a difference for fine motor this value will have be in
> > > the 5 to 10 range.
>
> Right -- I did apply Paul's recommendations. The manpage isn't
> necesarily going to know all the interactions between our TP, kernel
> driver and xorg input driver. Experimentation and source review carry
> more weight.
>
> I assume Paul did both -- he's been looking at this for a while.
>
> Now, in my experimentation with the values he supplied, it did not
> make any difference.
>
> > martin isn't seeing a difference, which surprises me, because i
> > definitely saw a difference between 0 and 1. from the wiki page
>
> Ok. Gentlemen, maybe it's a better idea to grab 2 XOs, setup 802 on
> one, 802B1 on the other, and run a quick test with the stock settings,
> and other settings you think might help.
okay, i've now done so, and i now think i see what you mean about
xset m 7/4 0
vs.
xset m 7/4 1
for large, faster movements, the latter ('1') is far more
controlled -- cursor doesn't go as far. this is the property
which made it attractive to richard and me, when we realized that
large touchpad jumps were being amplified by the acceleration
code.
however, for very small movements (like drawing a spiral), i see
that the former (i.e. "7/4 0") setting is better -- the cursor
doesn't tend to "get ahead" of the finger as much. (hard to
describe -- i guess it's just a matter of the cursor moving too
fast.)
having now observed this, i guess now think our X server actually
does implement what the latest xset man pages describe:
If the `threshold' parameter is provided and 0, the
`acceleration' parameter will be used in the exponent of a
more natural and continous formula, giving precise control
for slow motion but big reach for fast motion, and a
progresive transition for motions in between. Recommended
`acceleration' value in this case is 3/2 to 2, but not
limited to that range.
i think setting acceleration to 7/4 as we're doing is a little
aggressive, and i might choose a slightly smaller value (e.g.,
165 or 160/100 instead of 175/100) -- this is just one guy's
opinion. but i certainly agree now that the threshold arg should
be '0'.
paul
=-
paul fox, p...@laptop.org
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO 1.5 died
We'll swap it out. We are very curious about such a young death. wad On Jan 19, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Rob Savoye wrote: > I fired up my B2 XO 1.5 unit yesterday, the power light came on, then > went off, and now it won't power up at all. The same power supply > works > fine with a G1G1 unit. I was planning on using it for demos at > SCALE 8x > next month, any ideas ? I've tried using other power supplies, even a > charged battery from an older XO doesn't do anything. > > - rob - > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
p...@laptop.org said: > i'm afraid i've gotten not much feedback at all. and what i did get > was nothing much more than "it didn't make it worse". :-/ i also > hoped to get feedback from the folks running F11-on-XO1, since they're > all using the new driver as well (and, i think the new xset values, > but i'm not positive of that), but don't recall getting any. I've got a B3 and a C2 XO-1, both running F-11. It's a couple releases back from the latest to avoid the keyboard/touchpad getting lost issues. (or whatever the problem is, I forget) The B3 says: psmouse serio1: OLPC touchpad revision 0x28 The C2 says: psmouse serio1: OLPC touchpad revision 0x50 I use Implode as my test case. I keep my left thumb on the left edge of the space bar so I don't have to take my right finger off the touchpad to poke a button. It's mostly short to medium moves with an occasional long move to the upper left to get to the new-game button and back. The space bar works for getting rid of blocks, but the new-game button requires poking a real mouse button. Other than that, the touchpad is in constant use. The old/B3 unit works much better. There is no question which one I pick. Sometimes the new/C2 one works fine. Sometimes nothing happens when I try to make long moves. Sometimes it does strange things when I try for a short move. It's not quite random, but I can't figure out a pattern. It's likely that my nothing-happens frustrations are happening while it's trying to do a recalibration. Has anybody tried some sort of feedback? Either a beep-beep, or borrow a chunk of the screen. I thought I was reasonably well trained to get out of the way for a few seconds when it started acting up. I guess I've unlearned that. Log stuff from C2: Jan 19 09:37:00 localhost kernel: [108270.035916] psmouse serio1: detected secondary 13px jump in x Jan 19 09:37:00 localhost kernel: [108270.048092] psmouse serio1: scheduling recalibration Jan 19 09:37:02 localhost kernel: [108272.219736] psmouse serio1: detected 92px jump in x Jan 19 09:37:02 localhost kernel: [108272.230616] psmouse serio1: detected secondary 46px jump in x Jan 19 09:37:02 localhost kernel: [108272.240203] psmouse serio1: detected secondary 26px jump in x Jan 19 09:37:02 localhost kernel: [108272.254262] psmouse serio1: scheduling recalibration Jan 19 09:37:13 localhost kernel: [108282.436797] psmouse serio1: detected -43px jump in x >From B3: etected (0,0) Jan 19 09:20:05 localhost kernel: [138439.441322] psmouse serio1: packet spew detected (1,1) Jan 19 09:20:05 localhost kernel: [138439.477133] psmouse serio1: packet spew detected (2,1) Jan 19 09:20:05 localhost kernel: [138439.500405] psmouse serio1: packet spew detected (2,1) Jan 19 09:20:05 localhost kernel: [138439.536275] psmouse serio1: packet spew detected (2,1) Jan 19 09:20:52 localhost kernel: [138486.249148] psmouse serio1: detected 96px -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
XO 1.5 died
I fired up my B2 XO 1.5 unit yesterday, the power light came on, then went off, and now it won't power up at all. The same power supply works fine with a G1G1 unit. I was planning on using it for demos at SCALE 8x next month, any ideas ? I've tried using other power supplies, even a charged battery from an older XO doesn't do anything. - rob - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Weekly Infrastructure Meeting Reminder
Infrastructure/Systems meeting for Volunteer Infrastructure Gang (VIG), Sugar Labs Systems (SLS) and TreeHousers :) # Date: 2010-01-19 # Time: 21:00 UTC (16:00 EST, 22:00 CET) # Agenda: http://etherpad.com/ZNBbiFY2BA # Location: #treehouse on irc.oftc.net # or Link: http://embed.mibbit.com/?server=irc.oftc.net&channel=%23treehouse cu dogi ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
walter wrote: > > (FWIW, I am still of the opinion that we may want to disable the > touchpad on the old hardware and re-enable the resistive pad, which > should be more immune to some of the problems we have been > experiencing.) i agree that this would be a worthy experiment. the problem in the past with the pad mode has been at least partially with the switching back and forth. if we simply switched to pad mode and left it there, it might be preferable to what we have now. paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Paul Fox wrote: > martin wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > > > > According to the man page the 2nd parameter is the threshold at which > > > > the acceleration value is applied so I'm not surprised that you don't > > > > see any difference between 0 and 1. Even 4 might be hard to see. I > > > > think that to see a difference for fine motor this value will have be > in > > > > the 5 to 10 range. > > > > Right -- I did apply Paul's recommendations. The manpage isn't > > necesarily going to know all the interactions between our TP, kernel > > driver and xorg input driver. Experimentation and source review carry > > more weight. > > > > I assume Paul did both -- he's been looking at this for a while. > > > > Now, in my experimentation with the values he supplied, it did not > > make any difference. > > > > > martin isn't seeing a difference, which surprises me, because i > > > definitely saw a difference between 0 and 1. from the wiki page > > > > Ok. Gentlemen, maybe it's a better idea to grab 2 XOs, setup 802 on > > one, 802B1 on the other, and run a quick test with the stock settings, > > and other settings you think might help. > > now that i'm in the office, i can do exactly that today. > > > > > Also, Paul, did you get any response from deployments on whether the > > new kernel + xset values improved noticeably on the jumpyness? > > i'm afraid i've gotten not much feedback at all. and what i did > get was nothing much more than "it didn't make it worse". :-/ > i also hoped to get feedback from the folks running F11-on-XO1, > since they're all using the new driver as well (and, i think the > new xset values, but i'm not positive of that), but don't recall > getting any. > > using my own XO, i feel that it's better, but i'm way too familiar > with the code, and the exact nature of the touchpad problems, to > be objective. :-/ (my wife agrees with me, but she's hopefully > not completely impartial either. ;-) > > paul > =- > paul fox, p...@laptop.org > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > Where we really need feedback is from the field. Some of the worst touchpad issues I have seen are in a school deployment in Lima. Perhaps Hernan's team at USMP could do some testing? (FWIW, I am still of the opinion that we may want to disable the touchpad on the old hardware and re-enable the resistive pad, which should be more immune to some of the problems we have been experiencing.) regards. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
martin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > > > According to the man page the 2nd parameter is the threshold at which > > > the acceleration value is applied so I'm not surprised that you don't > > > see any difference between 0 and 1. Even 4 might be hard to see. I > > > think that to see a difference for fine motor this value will have be in > > > the 5 to 10 range. > > Right -- I did apply Paul's recommendations. The manpage isn't > necesarily going to know all the interactions between our TP, kernel > driver and xorg input driver. Experimentation and source review carry > more weight. > > I assume Paul did both -- he's been looking at this for a while. > > Now, in my experimentation with the values he supplied, it did not > make any difference. > > > martin isn't seeing a difference, which surprises me, because i > > definitely saw a difference between 0 and 1. from the wiki page > > Ok. Gentlemen, maybe it's a better idea to grab 2 XOs, setup 802 on > one, 802B1 on the other, and run a quick test with the stock settings, > and other settings you think might help. now that i'm in the office, i can do exactly that today. > > Also, Paul, did you get any response from deployments on whether the > new kernel + xset values improved noticeably on the jumpyness? i'm afraid i've gotten not much feedback at all. and what i did get was nothing much more than "it didn't make it worse". :-/ i also hoped to get feedback from the folks running F11-on-XO1, since they're all using the new driver as well (and, i think the new xset values, but i'm not positive of that), but don't recall getting any. using my own XO, i feel that it's better, but i'm way too familiar with the code, and the exact nature of the touchpad problems, to be objective. :-/ (my wife agrees with me, but she's hopefully not completely impartial either. ;-) paul =- paul fox, p...@laptop.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Touchpad accel, spirals and xset
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox wrote: > > According to the man page the 2nd parameter is the threshold at which > > the acceleration value is applied so I'm not surprised that you don't > > see any difference between 0 and 1. Even 4 might be hard to see. I > > think that to see a difference for fine motor this value will have be in > > the 5 to 10 range. Right -- I did apply Paul's recommendations. The manpage isn't necesarily going to know all the interactions between our TP, kernel driver and xorg input driver. Experimentation and source review carry more weight. I assume Paul did both -- he's been looking at this for a while. Now, in my experimentation with the values he supplied, it did not make any difference. > martin isn't seeing a difference, which surprises me, because i > definitely saw a difference between 0 and 1. from the wiki page Ok. Gentlemen, maybe it's a better idea to grab 2 XOs, setup 802 on one, 802B1 on the other, and run a quick test with the stock settings, and other settings you think might help. Also, Paul, did you get any response from deployments on whether the new kernel + xset values improved noticeably on the jumpyness? m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: kernel memory leak
Just confirming, by "leak" you mean that the kernel consumes more memory than the earlier kernel after boot? "leak" normally means you keep losing memory during operation. Is there a ticket in trac for this? dev.laptop.org. There was no mention of it in the RH BZ #487601. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
kernel memory leak
The kernel memory leak on XO-1 with Fedora 11 builds is a bug that is stagnate for a year now ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487601 ). Understandably has a low priority since there are no F11 releases for the XO-1 and no deployments use it. However, I think with the builds maturing and deployments eager to use it, "losing" 10% of your limited memory with a more demanding OS version and desktop, is rather important. I just want to bring this issue back in case some work can be done on this before an F11-XO1 release. I know is "upstream" but apparently this stream is not going anywhere. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
