Hi, On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:04:47PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:04:27PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > While looking at this, I found something that confused me further still. > > > > [ ... hooray for grabs ... ] > > > > With the [...] being TryClientEvents and setting deliveries if it was > > successful. So, if we have an XI1.x grab from one client on a window > > where another client has a XI2 event selection, it looks like we'll > > send an XI2 event to the XI1 client and never send an XI1 event. > > > > Shouldn't both the XI2 and XI1 branches be testing for grabtype == > > GRABTYPE_XI or GRABTYPE_XI2, like the core branch? > > > > If that's true, then I'll push v2 with your suggested if/else change. > > yes, you're right, that appears to be the case. should be quite simple to > knock up a test script to check, i think xinput's test-xi2 has basic code > for grabs so you could easily add an XI1 grab. > > having said all that, I'm not sure at this point if we still need the > eventMask vs deviceMask. This stuff dates back quite a while IIRC, before > the introduction of GRABTYPE_FOO. I'm unsure at the moment if there can be a > case where we need _both_ eventMask and deviceMask set for correct delivery.
OK, I'll send that as a separate patchset after I've finished another round of smooth-scrolling and synaptics (and probably miinitext death). In the meantime, I've resent the debug logging patches to the list as part of another small patchset. Thanks! Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
