From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: thinkpad-acpi: add thinkpad keys to input.h Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 15:25:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20070530142516.GA30009@srcf.ucam.org> References: <11802004861625-git-send-email-hmh@hmh.eng.br> <200705262340.28219.dtor@insightbb.com> <20070527121513.GC19562@khazad-dum.debian.net> <200705282316.32173.dtor@insightbb.com> <20070529130528.GB12935@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20070530140450.GA29514@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Richard Hughes , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 10:18:17AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Matthew, > >We've already got KEY_PROG* - is this not the sort of situation they're > >for? (ie, keys that aren't mapped to a specific purpose but would be > >potentially useful to userspace at the per-user level) > > > > Right. These are they keys "we have no idea how to use these, leave it > to the user". Do we really need more of these? We have quite a few > codes that might be useful. I just don't want to keep adding a new > input keycode every time we encounter an unmarked key somewhere. Sorry, I wasn't clear - I was thinking that they should just be used for this case, rather than that more of them be added. > >Changing the keymap is a privileged operation, so sending /some/ sort of > >keycode by default would probably be good. > > > > It's up to the security policy on a particular box. One could change > /dev/input/evdev ownership to the user currently logged on physical > console. Most users will be logged into X, so it's the X keymap that's the most interesting one. X tools know how to remap the X keymap without requiring any sort of special privileges, so all we need is for the keycode to generate /something/. I think KEY_PROG* would make the most sense, and that's what we've adopted in Ubuntu. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org