On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 03:12:33PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > KEY_BRIGHTNESSUP > > Only if I start filtering it out when disabled by the mask. This key is not > to be sent to userspace unless explicitly configured to do so by something > that KNOWS it will handle it right (hal). I'm not aware of any other application that uses it. > > KEY_VOLUMEUP > > No. This is handled in firmware in IBM thinkpads, and userspace only screws > it up. I am tired of watching people get this routed to the AC97 mixer by > default. That is a fringe configuration that only makes sense when using a > dock, and with the audio tied to the dock's audio port, in *all* thinkpads > but (_maybe_) the *61. It should either generate a KEY_VOLUMEUP or it should generate something explicitly defined as KEY_VOLUMEUP_PASSIVE. The proposed configuration (send something that does nothing, but include an arbitrary scancode) adds complexity and does nothing other than avoid a (harmless) odd result. > Let hal enable it if it needs it for OSD, and I sure hope HAL is wise enough > to do passive handling only for the events that come from the thinkpad event > device, because if one has an external multimedia keyboard, its volume keys > should go to the AC97/HDA mixer. That's fine. One will be coming from the i8042 (or USB) and the other will be coming from thinkpad_acpi. We already have the information needed to do something sensible there - we don't need to have different keycodes to determine which is which. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - 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
