On 10/16/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
quoted text
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >
> > > It still doesn't mean it belongs inside the stream of data for the keyboard,
> > > maskerading as a key press.
> >
> > But it *is* a key press!
>
> To get somewhat back on track: volume and brightness (and similar - lid
> close etc) events clearly are keypresses.
>
> However, I would also argue that a keypress that is acted on by the
> firmware automatically is *different* from a keypress that hasn't been
> acted on: one is a "key was pressed *and* hardware did something
> automatically", and the other is just a "key was pressed" event.
>
> IOW, I think the thinkpad issue (and others like it) should be fixed by
> splitting up the KEY_VOLUMEUP "key" into separate KEY_VOLUMEUP and
> KEY_VOLUMEUP_NOTIFY key events, so that downstream user mode (and the
> kernel itself, for that matter) can know whether it's a informational
> message or whether it should be acted upon.

I agree that these are 2 different events. My argument is that
"VOLUME_UP_NOTIFY" event is similar to "BATTERY_OUT_NOTIFY",
"DOCK_UNDOCK_NOTIFY", etc, etc and should be sent not through input
layer but through a generic (yet to be designed) notification
mechanism. Something lighter than input. Something like uevents over
netlink.


-- 
Dmitry
-
unsubscribe notice
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/