> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 2008-03-12 21:14:56, David Newall wrote:
> > > Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > > Very probably this is due to broken way how X themselves implement
> > > > auto-repeat, instead of using kernel-provided auto-repeat functionality.
> > >
> > > It should be said that X implements auto-repeat out of necessity. While
> > > the kernel can report key down and up events, its further interpretation
> > > of those events is not appropriate. Many combinations of events are
> > > possible, such as keyboard plus mouse, and this precludes the kernel
> > > from providing a full interpretation. It would be wrong for it to even
> > > try. X is the proper place to implement auto-repeat for X.
> >
> > No.
> >
> > hw is proper place to implement autorepeat, and along with some
> > buffering, it has chance to work. Kernel is not real-time, and X are
> > definitely not real-time, while autorepeat is real-time operation.
> >
> > It actually mostly works in ps/2 case. Buffer in hardware means that
> > pretty big interrupt delays can be tolerated without problems.
> >
> > --
> > (english)
http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> > (cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
> >
