Re: [RFC 0/3] HID: logitech-dj: Dinovo keyboard fixes and improvements

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 11/19/20 4:52 PM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 4:48 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 11/19/20 4:25 PM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>>> Hi Hans,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 10:21 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Benjamin,
>>>>
>>>> Here is my patch series for the discussed Dinovo keyboard (receiver)
>>>> support improvements.
>>>>
>>>> I've marked this as a RFC since it has not been tested with a Dinovo Mini
>>>> (nor a Dinovo Mini receiver) yet.
>>>>
>>>> I have tested it extensively with a Dinovo Edge, a MX5000 and a MX5500
>>>> keyboard. In case of the Dinovo Edge and MX5000 I've not only tested
>>>> them against their own receiver but also against each-others receiver.
>>>>
>>>> Once you have tested this series on your Dinovo Mini, it is ready to
>>>> go upstream.
>>>
>>> That part is now done, so I guess we can push it upstream :)
>>
>> Great thank you.
>>
>>> FTR, the dinovo mini still works fine with this series. I have a weird
>>> issue where the secondary button gives me a left click, but according
>>> to the raw logs, this is emitted from the hardware itself and is the
>>> same whether I am on hid-logitech-dj or not.
>>
>> A bit offtopic for this thread, but if it is a HID++ 1.0 device, then
>> you could try setting the HIDPP_QUIRK_HIDPP_EXTRA_MOUSE_BTNS quirk on
>> it and see if that helps. I've seen several cases with HID++ 1.0 devices
>> where some keyboard-keys / buttons would not report (or report wrongly)
>> unless the reporting of them was switched over from the regular HID
>> input report to the HID++ version of the report.
> 
> I'll have to test this, yes. Thanks.
> 
>>
>>>> The first patch should probably go to 5.10 as a fix in
>>>> case someone pairs the Dinovo Mini with a MX5x00 receiver like the
>>>> reporter of this bug did with his Dinovo Edge:
>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811424
>>>
>>> OK, then I can apply it on top of the previous fix. I guess we don't
>>> need stable@vger.k.o for this one?
>>
>> Actually this is intended for stable, to avoid getting a repeat of:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811424
>> with a Dinovo Mini. So if you can add a Cc: stable that would be
>> great.
>>
> 
> Oops, I have already pushed it without the tag. I guess we can always
> request it later...

No problem, the Fixes tag which it has alone should be enough for it to get
picked into the stable series.

Regards,

Hans