Am 19.07.2010 07:17, schrieb Peter Hutterer: > I don't think slotting it on top is just the way to go. Look at the driver > init process as a whole, it's a mess. some stuff is in the DIX, other stuff > in the DDX, rather randomly distributed in parts. I think mapping out a more > streamlined init process and then figuring out where to put the post init is > probably a better approach. Better - yes! Available - <please fill in :) >
I guess the dix parts relate to standardized behaviors (i.e. enabled/disabled devices), while the DDX part is more implementation-specific. As long as the distribution is along those lines, it doesn't sound too bad to me. >> EventListPtr xf86Events = NULL; >> >> +static int >> +xf86InputDeviceAfterDriverInit(DeviceIntPtr dev); > > why not just call it xf86PostInitDevice? Just because there's a lot of functions xf86Post*() which do post events. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
