Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750831AbWBVUBK (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:01:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751404AbWBVUBK (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:01:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:8622 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750831AbWBVUBI (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:01:08 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 12:00:47 -0800 From: Pete Zaitcev To: Vojtech Pavlik Cc: dtor_core@ameritech.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stuart_hayes@dell.com, zaitcev@redhat.com Subject: Re: Suppressing softrepeat Message-Id: <20060222120047.4fd9051e.zaitcev@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20060221210800.GA12102@suse.cz> References: <20060221124308.5efd4889.zaitcev@redhat.com> <20060221210800.GA12102@suse.cz> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.4 (GTK+ 2.8.12; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1587 Lines: 36 On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:08:00 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > A much simpler workaround for the DRAC3 is to set the softrepeat delay > to at least 750ms, using kbdrate(8), which will call the proper console > ioctl, resulting in updating the softrepeat parameters. > > I prefer workarounds for problematic hardware done outside the kernel, > if possible. I agree with the sentiment when posed in the abstract way, but let me tell you why this case is different. Firstly, there's nothing "problematic" about this. It's just how it is. The only problematic thing here is our code. Currently, the situation is assymetric. It is possible to force softrepeat on, but not possible to force softrepeat off. Isn't it broken? Secondly, 750ms may be not enough. Stuart is being shy here and posting explanations to Bugzilla for some reason. Lastly, it's such a PITA to add these things into the userland, that it's completely impractical. Console is needed the most when things go wrong. In such case, that echo(1) may not be reached before the single user shell. And stuffing it into the initrd is for Linux weenies only, unless automated by mkinitrd. I think you're being unreasonable here. I am not asking for NFS root or IP autoconfiguration and sort of complicated process which ought to be done in userland indeed. -- Pete - 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/