Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:16:37 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Cc: Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
	Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>,
	johannes@sipsolutions.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-input@vger.kernel.org, marcel@holtmann.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] input: Add KEY_RFKILL
Message-ID: <20100218041636.GA19037@core.coreip.homeip.net>
References: <1266356185-10324-1-git-send-email-mjg@redhat.com>
 <20100217052247.GD7160@core.coreip.homeip.net>
 <20100217180342.GA22522@srcf.ucam.org>
 <22ee4e771002171043u2aaf97vd73c1090c2fce901@mail.gmail.com>
 <20100217184502.GA23573@srcf.ucam.org>
 <1266432575.678.980.camel@localhost.localdomain>
 <20100217223450.GC22561@barra.bne.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <20100217223450.GC22561@barra.bne.redhat.com>
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 08:34:50AM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:49:35PM +0000, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 18:45 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 07:43:56PM +0100, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Wait wait... do you can get another KEY_?
> > > > 
> > > > The reason: Some new devices come with a WPS "Push Button".
> > > > And there's no code for them yet.
> > > 
> > > What's a WPS button? There's no fundamental issue with getting new KEY_ 
> > > codes defined, but bear in mind that anything greater than 255 won't be 
> > > seen by X at present.
> > 
> > Won't be seen by most X applications. The server should definitely see
> > it, so should applications that use XInput2-aware widget sets.
> > 
> > (Which obviously means not much at all right now).
> 
> Because XKB2 never happened we don't actually have any way of configuring
> keysyms in the server for keys > 255 or getting this layout information to
> the client. So XI2 applications that want to use higher keycodes are reliant
> on the keycode itself which is strictly speaking random - at least the
> protocol makes no guarantee that they remain fixed.
> 
> In practice that's not quite true and the keycodes are likely to remain
> fixed but relying on that hurt us quite badly in the keyboard -> evdev
> conversion.
>

FWIW the event codes defines in linux/input.h form ABI and thus will not
be changed (exception is adding aliases better describing intended key
usage, such as KEY_COFFEE -> KEY_SCREENLOCK).

-- 
Dmitry