Hi,
On 24 November 2017 at 11:59, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 15:45:48 +0200
> Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
>> 2. Should we introduce similar timestamp events for keyboard and pointer?
>
> No, unless someone actually has a
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 15:45:48 +0200
Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> wl_touch events currently use a 32-bit timestamp with millisecond
> resolution. In some cases, notably latency measurements, this resolution
> is too coarse-grained to be useful.
>
> This protocol
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 18:20:08 +0200
Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:52:00PM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:45:48PM +0200, Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> > > wl_touch events currently use a 32-bit timestamp with
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:52:00PM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:45:48PM +0200, Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> > wl_touch events currently use a 32-bit timestamp with millisecond
> > resolution. In some cases, notably latency measurements, this resolution
> > is too
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 03:45:48PM +0200, Alexandros Frantzis wrote:
> wl_touch events currently use a 32-bit timestamp with millisecond
> resolution. In some cases, notably latency measurements, this resolution
> is too coarse-grained to be useful.
>
> This protocol update adds a
wl_touch events currently use a 32-bit timestamp with millisecond
resolution. In some cases, notably latency measurements, this resolution
is too coarse-grained to be useful.
This protocol update adds a wl_touch.timestamp event, which is emitted
just before an up, motion or down touch event. The