From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=E9meth_M=E1rton?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: scancode in get/set_keycodes should be unsigned Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 09:40:18 +0100 Message-ID: <4B8A2BF2.40003@freemail.hu> References: <20100228061310.GA765@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4B8A10D0.2020802@freemail.hu> <20100228070536.GC765@core.coreip.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100228070536.GC765@core.coreip.homeip.net> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Matthew Garrett , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Jiri Kosina , Linux Input , Linux Media Mailing List , Platform Driver x86 List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 07:44:32AM +0100, N=E9meth M=E1rton wrote: >> Hi, >> Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> The HID layer has some scan codes of the form 0xffbc0000 for logite= ch >>> devices which do not work if scancode is typed as signed int, so we= need >>> to switch to unsigned int instead. While at it keycode being signed= does >>> not make much sense either. >> Are the scan codes and key codes always 4 bytes long? Then the u32 d= ata >> type could be used to take 16 bit (or 64 bit) processors also into >> consideration. >> >=20 > We do not support 16 bit processors and for 64 bit 'unsigned int' is > still 32 bits. >=20 OK, then: Acked-by: M=E1rton N=E9meth