Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 21:48:16 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Chris Heath <chris@heathens.co.nz>
Cc: aebr@win.tue.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vojtech@ucw.cz,
       Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de>
Subject: Re: keyboard - was: Re: Linux 2.6.0-test4
Message-ID: <20030904204816.GD31590@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
References: <20030903235647.C765.CHRIS@heathens.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030903235647.C765.CHRIS@heathens.co.nz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1002
Lines: 23

Chris Heath wrote:
> 1. I assume it is OK to defer processing the code e0 until the following
> byte arrives.  Are there any keyboards out there with e0 in the keyboard
> ID?  This could break the atkbd probe for such keyboards.  (The
> alternative would be to pass the repeated key releases through to atkbd,
> and let that layer remove the duplicates.)
> 
> 2. The event that appears between two repeated key releases is always a
> key release and not a key press.
> 
> 3. There will only be at most one key event in between two repeated key 
> releases.

Why so many complicated assumptions?  Just maintain a bitmap if key
up/down states (initialised to up), and if you receive a release event
when the key is in the up state, ignore the event.

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/