On Thu 20-04-06 20:35:28, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > Matthew Garrett wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 08:28:02PM +0400, Alexey > >Starikovskiy wrote: > > > >>I don't quite understand your point... You want all > >>buttons/switches in a computer to send events to input > >>layer, regardless if this make sense or not, just to be > >>consistent? May be you should go other way around and > >>if keyboard has some strange key, send it on its > >>strange way? > > > >There's a reason that KEY_POWER and KEY_SLEEP are > >already present in /usr/include/linux/input.h. It makes > >sense to expose keys that are on my keyboard in the same > >way as other keys on my keyboard. Just think of the ACPI > >events interface as a bus that a small keyboard with not > >many keys sits on. > > > >>From the userspace point of view, it's *far* easier to > >>deal with this > >stuff if the keys generate keycodes. > Lid is a _switch_ with state, how many keys on keyboard > have same behavior? Do you want to introduce special case > just for that? It is already there. Handhelds have lid switches controlled by input. Old capslock keys (around XT era) actually worked like that, too. (And input was actually _designed_ to handle them). Pavel -- Thanks, Sharp! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
