From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753393AbeDZTQa (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:16:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f68.google.com ([74.125.83.68]:43386 "EHLO mail-pg0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751481AbeDZTQ2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:16:28 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+f7qNzP2S0FMSwM6c4WNd93mALstJYnRNee6c6h0XzFqIbWI8N+FTxah6gKnxMAw6cxH79rA== Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:16:24 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko Cc: Juergen Gross , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lyan@suse.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, andrii_chepurnyi@epam.com, Oleksandr Andrushchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: xen-kbdfront - allow better run-time configuration Message-ID: <20180426191624.GB162443@dtor-ws> References: <20180418150445.9805-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <2bff035e-303e-d644-5f51-5e64150c097c@gmail.com> <20180423185325.GB66646@dtor-ws> <8ef84389-4659-d4bb-271f-53155062b7b6@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <8ef84389-4659-d4bb-271f-53155062b7b6@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:55:19AM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > On 04/23/2018 09:53 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:44:19PM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > > On 04/19/2018 02:25 PM, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > On 18/04/18 17:04, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > > > > From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko > > > > > > > > > > It is now only possible to control if multi-touch virtual device > > > > > is created or not (via the corresponding XenStore entries), > > > > > but keyboard and pointer devices are always created. > > > > Why don't you want to go that route for keyboard and mouse, too? > > > > Or does this really make no sense? > > > Well, I would prefer not to touch anything outside Linux and > > > this driver. And these settings seem to be implementation specific. > > > So, this is why introduce Linux module parameters and don't extend > > > the kbdif protocol. > > Why do you consider this implementation specific? How other guests > > decide to forego creation of relative pointer device or keyboard-like > > device? > > > > You already have "features" for absolute pointing device and multitouch, > > so please extend the protocol properly so you indeed do not code > > something implementation-specific (i.e. module parameters). > Ok, but in order to preserve the default behavior, e.g. > pointer and keyboard devices are always created now, I'll have > to have reverse features in the protocol: >  - feature-no-pointer >  - feature-no-keyboard > The above may be set as a part of frontend's configuration and > if missed are considered to be set to false. I think you can have them as "feature-pointer" and "feature-keyboard" (no negation), but assume not present considered enabled. I.e. kbd = xenbus_read_unsigned(..., XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_KEYBOARD, 1); if (kbd) { ... } Thanks. -- Dmitry