Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753381Ab2BVPYV (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:24:21 -0500 Received: from smtprelay-b22.telenor.se ([195.54.99.213]:46824 "EHLO smtprelay-b22.telenor.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753259Ab2BVPYS (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:24:18 -0500 X-SENDER-IP: [85.230.170.239] X-LISTENER: [smtp.bredband.net] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai5bALIHRU9V5qrvPGdsb2JhbABEiXGoeRkBAQEBNzSBcwEBBAEyASMREgULCAMOOBQlChqIFAO3ExOMRBUVAwcLAwQLAgsCBQoVCohZYwSRWINfhW2NAoFSEA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,464,1325458800"; d="scan'208";a="272729337" From: "Henrik Rydberg" Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:24:25 +0100 To: Daniel Kurtz Cc: Chung-yih Wang , Alessandro Rubini , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] CHROMIUM: Input: synaptics - filter out the events with low z values Message-ID: <20120222152425.GA29436@polaris.bitmath.org> References: <1329896503-28394-1-git-send-email-cywang@chromium.org> <20120222083858.GA26570@polaris.bitmath.org> <20120222110459.GA28126@polaris.bitmath.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3394 Lines: 74 > > I see the problem. However, ignoring it will just move the problem > > forward to another bug report, will it not? ?Hysteresis is a slam dunk > > here. ?In addition, since the low-pressure state is bound to be > > transitional (soon to be followed by a real num_fingers==1 package), > > simply skipping such packages might be a better option. > > In practice, we don't actually see the profile sensor pad sending one > low-z finger, and one high-z finger. In the case where one finger is > solidly on the pad, and another finger is hovering, lifting, or > alighting, the pad sends 2 high-z fingers, with one of them having a > completely wrong x or y coordinate. Urgh. > The two reported z-values are > nearly, but not exactly, identical. I can't think of good fix for > this, other than adding finger tracking and filtering out via > 'moved-too-far-too-fast', where possible, and I'd prefer that this be > handled in userspace. It sounds like the z value in the second packet carries zero information. If that were true, the fact that the patch is effective suggests the semi-mt slot reporting could follow BTN_TOUCH, more or less. In doing so, you would also obtain hysteresis automatically. > The 1-low-z && 1-high-z case that we are > discussing here isn't actually ever triggered; either both fingers are > high-z, or neither are. I suspect it depends a bit on the values of low-z and hi-z, respectively? Otherwise, there really is no information in that extra packet. > The real usefulness of this patch is filtering out the 1-low-z-finger > and 2-low-z fingers cases. > > As for the hypothetical 1-finger-hi, 1-finger-low case, which I asked > Chung-yih to add because it seemed like a good idea in theory... > > Yes, I think you have a good point. Thanks to evdev's stateful > nature, simply skipping the (1-strong,1-weak) packet might actually > work better than forcing num_fingers == 0. > > For cases where a second finger is temporarily reporting low-z because > it is arriving or leaving, evdev would just lock the (1 or 2 initial) > fingers in their current position until the transition is over, and > then start reporting the new number of fingers at their new positions. > > For cases where there is one high-z finger, and a hovering thumb or > palm triggers 2-finger reporting temporarily (without ever going above > the threshold), the original finger will get frozen in its current > position until the hovering finger is no longer detected, and then > snap to its new position. This might cause strange sudden jumps, but > that seems unavoidable. A lot of things seem unavoidable with this hardware. :-) > I'm not sure hysteresis is a "slam dunk"... in fact, I don't see how > it would help much. But, it is hard to argue against adding the > functionality, since the hysteresis window can be made arbitrarily > small. Perhaps if you are inclined, you can elaborate on why you > think it is important. The most striking effect is the ability to better retain a drag. Although the statement was made in light of possible (1-strong,1-weak) packets, it should help in the 2-weak case too. Thanks, Henrik -- 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/