Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Input: xen-kbdfront - allow better run-time configuration

[Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/26/2018 10:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> 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 <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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) {
>                 ...
Thank you for your comments,
could you please take a look at the patch [1] where I am trying
to change the corresponding Xen protocol to fit the requirements?
As we agreed I have to change the protocol first, so this patch is no 
longer valid
>         }
>
> Thanks.
Thank you,
Oleksandr
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-input/msg56094.html

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel