On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:57:54PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > I'm not exactly sure what this test is supposed to do, but > ET_ProximityOut + 1 works out to ET_DeviceChanged, so just use that > instead.
look at the code in dix/eventconvert.c. Up to ET_ProximityOut, the server returns BadMatch for events that can be generated and will be called for conversion. All events that aren't covered (and ET_DeviceChanged is one of them) return BadImplementation. Note that I've had these tests sitting in my branches for a while before publishing them, so it's quite possible that when I wrote the code ET_DeviceChanged didn't exist yet and ET_ProximityOut was the last event in the list. I'm not sure anymore. so, yes, the +1 is incorrect because we should be checking up to ET_XQuartz, but this patch isn't it either :) Cheers, Peter > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Stone <[email protected]> > --- > test/input.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/test/input.c b/test/input.c > index c389a40..e443f75 100644 > --- a/test/input.c > +++ b/test/input.c > @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ static void dix_event_to_core_conversion(void) > { > dix_event_to_core_fail(0, BadImplementation); > dix_event_to_core_fail(1, BadImplementation); > - dix_event_to_core_fail(ET_ProximityOut + 1, BadImplementation); > + dix_event_to_core_fail(ET_DeviceChanged, BadImplementation); > dix_event_to_core_fail(ET_ProximityIn, BadMatch); > dix_event_to_core_fail(ET_ProximityOut, BadMatch); > > -- > 1.7.2.3 _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
