Re: Proposal: change keycode for scancode e0 32 from 150 to 172

[Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl>]

Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
>> In PS/2 mode it reports E0 32 which gets converted to keycode 150. In 
>> USB mode it reports E0 02 which gets converted to keycode 172.
>> I don't know if it's the keyboard itself that's being inconsistent, or 
>> if it is the table in usbkbd.c that's broken (in which case it should be 
>> fixed to be consistent with the keyboard in PS/2 mode.)
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> First, usbkbd.c has very probably zero business with this - the mappings 
> are being done in hid-input.c, usbkdb.c is only for embedded/debugging 
> cases, and is almost never used on modern systems (see the corresponding 
> Kconfig help text).
> 
>> You seem to be of the opinion that "usb behaviour is correct", but don't 
>> give any motivation why usb should take precedence.  Offhand, I would 
>> expect there to be fewer translation layers for PS/2 and would therefore 
>> assume PS/2 is more inherently correct.
> 
> For USB, we have Hid Usage Pages, which define this to be KEY_HOMEPAGE. 
> There is no such specification for PS/2 though, so what Hans is proposing 
> is to make it consistent with behavior of USB HID devices, which I agree 
> with.
> 

Good to hear, so as everyone smees to agree, shall I write a (massive, complex, 
intrusive) patch to fix this, or are there until now silent parties that object?

Regards,

Hans