Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2023 12:52:43 -0700
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To:     Siarhei Vishniakou <svv@google.com>
Cc:     Biswarup Pal <biswarupp@google.com>, kernel-team@android.com,
        linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Call input_set_timestamp for events injected using uinput
Message-ID: <ZEwkC7BiUpq7kbjc@google.com>
References: <20230427000152.1407471-1-biswarupp@google.com>
 <CAKF84v2Rw8xQv=m+ciL+n_uXhyAZWFmhYpgA63Q=DnVh5sbOsw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKF84v2Rw8xQv=m+ciL+n_uXhyAZWFmhYpgA63Q=DnVh5sbOsw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:38:36AM -0700, Siarhei Vishniakou wrote:
> Thanks Biswarup!

Please avoid top posting.

> 
> Just to add a bit of context: we were concerned with  breaking the
> existing uinput usages where the caller might be setting an incorrect
> value (since previously, that had no effect).
> So the 10 second guard was added to fall back to the default behaviour
> for those devices.

What is the benefit of sending this in uinput? It is not much close
to the exact time the hardware generated the event than the timestamp
generated in the input core, so I do not see why it is needed in uinput.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry