From: Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@euromail.se>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@nokia.com>,
Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>,
Benjamin Tissoires <tissoire@cena.fr>,
Stephane Chatty <chatty@enac.fr>,
Rafi Rubin <rafi@seas.upenn.edu>,
Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol (rev4)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:28:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1112B0.8070806@euromail.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100610135634.GD4514@ucw.cz>
Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> +Protocol Example A
>> +------------------
>> +
>> +Here is what a minimal event sequence for a two-contact touch would look
>> +like for a type A device:
>> +
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[0]
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[0]
>> + SYN_MT_REPORT
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[1]
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[1]
>> + SYN_MT_REPORT
>> + SYN_REPORT
> ...
>> -Usage
>> ------
>> +Here is the sequence after lifting the first contact:
>> +
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[1]
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[1]
>> + SYN_MT_REPORT
>> + SYN_REPORT
>
> ...
>
>> +Protocol Example B
>> +------------------
>> +
>> +Here is what a minimal event sequence for a two-contact touch would look
>> +like for a type B device:
>> +
>> + ABS_MT_SLOT 0
>> + ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID 45
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[0]
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[0]
>> + ABS_MT_SLOT 1
>> + ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID 46
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[1]
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_Y y[1]
>> + SYN_REPORT
>> +
>> +Here is the sequence after moving contact 45 in the x direction:
>> +
>> + ABS_MT_SLOT 0
>> + ABS_MT_POSITION_X x[0]
>> + SYN_REPORT
>
> With this proposed system, protocol A is *very* different from
> protocol B. Is there way to make them more similar?
Hello,
unfortunately, the two protocols are different for a reason. Given the point of
the type B protocol, to reduce bandwidth and accommodate filtering in the input
core, the major difference is that type A receivers always expect all data
between synchronizations, whereas type B devices never send all data. This alone
means a receiver wishing to support both type of streams will need to know what
type of stream to expect. This is accomplished by the presence of ABS_MT_SLOT.
Secondly, in order to not break the established semantics of events, ABS_MT_SLOT
is used instead SYN_MT_REPORT. This also makes type B devices in type A
applications stop working in a somewhat graceful fashion.
The usage of SYN_MT_REPORT versus ABS_MT_SLOT is the only syntactic difference
between the protocols, and it stems from the different interpretation of what
comes through the wire. IMHO, it means the way the type B protocol is formulated
is the smallest possible change that accommodates the required effect.
Thanks,
Henrik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-10 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-22 22:30 [PATCH 1/2] input: mt: Introduce MT event slots (rev 5) Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-22 22:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] input: mt: Document the MT event slot protocol (rev4) Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-23 6:52 ` Ping Cheng
2010-05-23 9:20 ` Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-23 17:24 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-05-23 22:27 ` Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-23 23:46 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-05-23 23:47 ` Ping Cheng
2010-05-24 7:13 ` Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-24 17:01 ` Ping Cheng
2010-05-24 18:02 ` Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-24 18:13 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-05-24 18:31 ` Henrik Rydberg
2010-05-25 16:33 ` Ping Cheng
2010-06-10 13:56 ` Pavel Machek
2010-06-10 16:28 ` Henrik Rydberg [this message]
2010-06-10 14:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] input: mt: Introduce MT event slots (rev 5) Chase Douglas
2010-06-15 4:59 ` Rafi Rubin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C1112B0.8070806@euromail.se \
--to=rydberg@euromail.se \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chatty@enac.fr \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mdpoole@troilus.org \
--cc=mika.kuoppala@nokia.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peter.hutterer@who-t.net \
--cc=rafi@seas.upenn.edu \
--cc=tissoire@cena.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).