On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 06:34:49PM -0500, Paul Fox wrote:
echo [1|0] /sys/devices/platform/i8042/serio1/ptmode
Thanks for working on this! Unfortunately enabling PT mode makes the
touchpad stop working for me. After disabling it again it works as if
nothing had happened. There are no
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 08:00:08PM +0100, Sascha Silbe wrote:
echo [1|0] /sys/devices/platform/i8042/serio1/ptmode
Thanks for working on this! Unfortunately enabling PT mode makes the
touchpad stop working for me.
Actually it did work, I just didn't realize it needs considerable force
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've just pushed changes to the olpc-2.6.31 branch that let one
do
Sorry for the delayed response, I think I need to play around and compile a
kernel module and then use it on the xo-1. But to answer a few of the
questions...
The init of the psmouse module
triggers a calibration.
that's certainly true, but i think it happens pretty early -- the
kernel is
james wrote:
Sorry for the delayed response, I think I need to play around and compile a
kernel module and then use it on the xo-1. But to answer a few of the
questions...
The init of the psmouse module
triggers a calibration.
that's certainly true, but i think it happens
To prove, first turn off how the existing module triggers
recalibrations
Reproduced without changing parameters or a nose.
Turning off the recalibrations was just to allow miscalibration to persist
for demonstration purposes. Ie, starting from first principles to show my
reasoning.
I
james -- thanks for taking a fresh look at this.
james wrote:
Thanks Martin,
With some help from the people at #olpc-devel such as pgf, I was able to
look at where I needed to to test some theories.
Looking at the code in hgpk.c that runs on the xo-1 I'm testing on,
The first
james wrote:
One thing I realised I could have emphasised is that the attempted
recalibration based on jumpiness is self perpetuating. Much like why
post_interrupt_delay didn't work. We're trying to think of things the device
developers would have already thought about.
very true -- the
I've just setup my xo-1 with os11 and updated to near-latest (within a week
off the top of my head) kernel + kernel-firmware.
I'd like to do some touchpad testing if its of any help, but will need do a
bit of a mental download to understand the pieces at play here.
If someone could respond with
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:
Ok. How does t165/100 test? So far we have suggested tests:
- spirals test
- using etoys / scratch
So we are now testing with xset m 7/4 0 vs xset m 165/100 0
this afternoon i was using spirals in Paint for
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 6:29 PM, James Zaki james.z...@gmail.com wrote:
I've just setup my xo-1 with os11 and updated to near-latest (within a week
off the top of my head) kernel + kernel-firmware.
I'd like to do some touchpad testing if its of any help, but will need do a
bit of a mental
martin wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:
Ok. How does t165/100 test? So far we have suggested tests:
- spirals test
- using etoys / scratch
So we are now testing with xset m 7/4 0 vs xset m 165/100 0
this afternoon i was
Thanks Martin,
With some help from the people at #olpc-devel such as pgf, I was able to
look at where I needed to to test some theories.
Looking at the code in hgpk.c that runs on the xo-1 I'm testing on,
The first thing I suspect most people do while waiting for the gui to become
responsive is
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 01:30:06AM +0100, James Zaki wrote:
The first thing I suspect most people do while waiting for the gui to
become responsive is try to move the curser.
Yes, I've seen children do that. Or press keyboard keys hoping it will
go faster booting. It seems to work for them
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
martin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:
martin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
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
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,
martin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
martin wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org 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
Late last year Gary and others volunteered to test my 802b1 build,
with a nice test practice from Gary of drawing spirals. It took me a
while to get back onto this (apologies - real life intruded in a big
way), but I have been working on this again, hoping to close it.
I took 4 laptops (2 with
martin wrote:
Late last year Gary and others volunteered to test my 802b1 build,
with a nice test practice from Gary of drawing spirals. It took me a
while to get back onto this (apologies - real life intruded in a big
way), but I have been working on this again, hoping to close it.
I
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:
in my testing, setting
the final argument to 0 resulted in extremely jerky performance.
Was that with the new or old psmouse code?
Have you got a test procedure I can try, maybe drawing spirals isn't
the only relevant test...?
martin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:
in my testing, setting
the final argument to 0 resulted in extremely jerky performance.
Was that with the new or old psmouse code?
Have you got a test procedure I can try, maybe drawing spirals isn't
On 01/18/2010 07:23 AM, Martin Langhoff wrote:
* Going from xset 7/4 0 to 7/4 1 did not make a noticeable improvement
-- and does bring the drawback that a fast finger swipe no longer gets
you across the screen. This is a usability regression, and I don't
have much evidence to show to counter
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Richard A. Smith rich...@laptop.org wrote:
What you see as a regression I see as an enhancement. My evidence is based
on what deployments/pilots talk about when they come give reports at 1cc.
When we talk about touchpad problems it often mentioned that the
On 01/18/2010 01:31 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Richard A. Smithrich...@laptop.org wrote:
What you see as a regression I see as an enhancement. My evidence is based
on what deployments/pilots talk about when they come give reports at 1cc.
When we talk about
On 01/18/2010 12:34 PM, Paul Fox wrote:
You are suggesting xset m 7/4 4? My tests where with 7/4 1...
oh! sorry -- i was mis-remembering. you're correct that i
previously recommended that the last element should be 1, and
that's still correct. (although in practice greater values
smith wrote:
On 01/18/2010 12:34 PM, Paul Fox wrote:
You are suggesting xset m 7/4 4? My tests where with 7/4 1...
oh! sorry -- i was mis-remembering. you're correct that i
previously recommended that the last element should be 1, and
that's still correct. (although in
31 matches
Mail list logo
