From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Fvb2I-00046U-7P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:28:58 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Fvb2G-00046H-O8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:28:57 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fvb2G-00046E-KO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:28:56 -0400
Received: from [128.8.10.163] (helo=po1.wam.umd.edu)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FvbEb-0007f5-QU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:41:41 -0400
Received: from jbrown.mylinuxbox.org (jma-box.student.umd.edu [129.2.250.193])
	by po1.wam.umd.edu (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
	k5SESqbB008124
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:28:52 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:28:51 -0400
From: "Jim C. Brown" <jma5@umd.edu>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu kbd emulation
Message-ID: <20060628142851.GA16101@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org>
References: <200606281027.31617.zswi@pers.pl> <44A24028.20005@gmx.de>
	<200606281416.57021.zswi@pers.pl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200606281416.57021.zswi@pers.pl>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Rafa?? Cygnarowski wrote:
> So now I have to find out:
> - where those fake keycodes were dropped,
> - why after loading my test program those two 8s are displayed 
>   (there is some unneeded interrupt generated - am I right?).
> 
> Honestly, I don't know where I should start looking...
> 

Not sure if this is the cause, but I believe that ps2_read_data remembers the last key pressed and returns it if there is no new key to be read (to make it work with EMM386 it seems).

I have an ugly hack that fixes the code so there are no more key repeats, but I was never able to figure out what caused the key drops.

-- 
Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty.
Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.