From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60806 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PdmYx-0000bK-HP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:31:45 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PdmUU-0004y3-7w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:27:07 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16459) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PdmUT-0004xm-Uj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:27:06 -0500 Message-ID: <4D307952.8060407@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 17:26:58 +0100 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] paravirtual mouse/tablet References: <4D2ED1C8.7070304@redhat.com> <4D2F1FA3.5030701@codemonkey.ws> <4D2F24EE.6070505@redhat.com> <4D2F2AB3.4020907@codemonkey.ws> <4D30332F.2070003@redhat.com> <108D35F5-7E49-4598-8903-599190A885E1@suse.de> <4D306DC9.8040805@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4D306DC9.8040805@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , spice-devel , Alexander Graf , Avi Kivity Hi, >> I guess a mere tuple of (x,y,down) N times should be enough for the >> protocol, no? > > Surely, evdev has an interface to support this already. Let's just do > what it does instead of inventing something that none of us can validate > actually works. http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/input/multi-touch-protocol.txt Looks like the linux input layer does effectively the same: send series of events for multitouch. A sync event to mark the end of the batch is obviously a pretty good idea I'm going to steal. Some devices seem to be able to attach IDs to the touchpoints. Then you don't have to send the whole set each time but can limit yourself to the ones which did actually change. We should support that too. > Or better yet, delay implementing it until someone actually knows how to > support it. I think we can get sane support into the protocol right from start, and that is much better than adding something afterwards. Just look at the linux input layer document -- some of the loops they have to hop though are there just because multitouch is a extension which came later. cheers, Gerd