Hello Johannes, Johannes Stezenbach [2009-11-26 18:39 +0100]: > I guess it would make sense to add support for the forced release > attribute into extras/keymap/keymap.c Indeed, that'd need to happen now that it gets pushed out of the kernel. > in such a way that the keymap files (e.g. samsung-other) can have an > optional third column with flags. This sounds good. > Since many models share samsung-other, but only > three had the force_release handled in to the kernel > I'd also add a flag to keymap.c so that the > forced_release flag is only applied when the --force-release/-f > switch is present. I don't understand this. We need separate rules for the quirked vs. non-quirked models anyway, so why would we need this -f switch if we already specify it in the rules? I think I see what you try to do, but IMHO it would just make matters more confusing, and not really help to reduce rules either. > The we can add two lines to 95-keymap.rules, > one for models which need the quirk and one fo the others. > On an older kernel which doesn't support the force_release > sysfs attribute the flag would be silently ignored. > > Entries in samsung-other would then look like this: > > 0x82 switchvideomode force_release # Fn+F4 CRT/LCD (high keycode: "displaytoggle") > 0x83 battery force_release,some_other_flag # Fn+F2 > 0x84 prog1 # Fn+F5 backlight on/off This looks good. > Should I go forward and try to implement it? That would be great! Thanks, Martin -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
