From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zephaniah E. Hull" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: Support for a less exclusive grab. Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:44:41 -0400 Message-ID: <20071026164441.GI26573@aehallh.com> References: <20070609084800.GR6362@aehallh.com> <1193191094.32696.2.camel@moonpix.desrt.ca> <200710232333.08306.dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> <20071024153508.GG26573@aehallh.com> <1193290654.15893.2.camel@moonpix.desrt.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1193290654.15893.2.camel@moonpix.desrt.ca> Sender: owner-linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: To: Ryan Lortie Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vojtech Pavlik , linux-input List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:37:34AM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote: > On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: > > We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the > > text console. The current solution sucks for things like rfkill. > > > > I'm not convinced that Ryan's fix is any better, but just saying that X > > should open the console and ignore the characters is simply not an > > option as far as I am concerned for X. > > Can you think of any other way to separate things like rfkill/evdev from > things like the text console that's less hacky than my 'priority' > scheme? What we really want to give is exclusitivity verses other 'end users', as opposed the 'filters'. I'm defining an 'end user' to be a handler that cares about all the events from a device and plans on doing something with it. That would be the console layer for keyboards, /dev/input/mice and /dev/input/mouse for mice, X for both of those, etc. A 'filter' cares about a key or two, and might even want to remove it from the stream, rfkill is a good example. Now, how do we design for that? Not a clue right now, still thinking about it really. Zephaniah E. Hull.