[patch] ignore trackpad/mouse while typing
till.straumann at tu-berlin.de
Sun Jan 26 05:04:27 EST 2003
Thanks for your feedback. Please let me work on this a little more.
The first version of the patch has 2 flaws:
- emulated mouse buttons are treated as normal key events and
are hence suppressed (that's already fixed but introduces a very
ugly dependency on the mac-hid driver).
- the same applies to modifier keys. Unfortunately, we need a list
of these keys (and there is obviously no way to know what keys
are 'modifiers' for a specific application program (such as X)).
Unfortunately, I still see the kernel as the proper place to handle this
(feature shared by all applications; 'semi-real time' nature of the
'input' is the place where mouse and key events come together.)
Then, there is one more problem: I had a disk-crash and I have to wait
for my new disk before I can continue working (or even look at the code).
PS: I added a few comments to the discussion below
On Saturday, January 25, 2003, at 10:25 , Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 22:04, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
>>>> Well... the problem happpens in console as well, and with other
>>>> non-X apps like MacOnLinux. Some Apple PowerBooks have over-sensitive
>>>> trackpad. Apple themselves implement a similar mecanism in the kernel
>>>> driver of OS X.
>>> Mine is one of those machines. I have to turn off gpm for sure,
>>> and X is
>>> quite oversensitive too (tuned it in KDE, but still this
>>> functionality would
>>> be very nice).
>> How about implementing it in mousedev.c?
> Right, though it would need hooks in kbddev or something to know
> about keystrokes.
Yeah - that's why I put it into 'input' - that's the only piece of code
who knows about both, key and mouse events. BTW: I put the control
file into /proc/sys../input and not mac-hid because the feature is not
limited to macs.
> Also, I don't like the sysctl's as those need
> allocating sysctl numbers,
Unfortunately, the list of 'modifier' keys needs to be configurable as
How can we do that without sysctl?
> which are always a problem. In 2.5,
> we could have these in sysfs, though for 2.4 I'm not sure what
> to do.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev