On Nov 29, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
1. Do we agree that a lirc (-style) kernel-user interface is needed
at
least?
2. Is there any problem with lirc kernel-user interface?
Can you consider sending the raw IR data as a new evdev message type
instead of creating a new device protocol?
No, I think it would be wrong. Such events are ill-suited for
consumption by regular applications and would introduce the "looping"
interface I described in my other email.
evdev protects the messages in a transaction to stop incomplete
messages from being read.
If such property is desired we can add it to the new lirc-like
interface, can't we?
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
