On 11-01-25 12:29 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:04:10AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: >> On 11-01-24 11:55 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: .. >>> The options are: >>> >>> 1. Convert to EVIOCGKEYCODE2 >>> 2. Ignore errors from EVIOCGKEYCODE and go through all 65536 iterations. >> >> or 3. Revert/fix the in-kernel regression. >> >> The EVIOCGKEYCODE ioctl is supposed to return KEY_RESERVED for unmapped >> (but value) keycodes, and only return -EINVAL when the keycode itself >> is out of range. > > You are inventing rules. You are requesting a scancode->keycode > mapping. If scancode is unknown/invalid for the device ioctl returns > -EINVAL. -EINVAL signals bad/invalid parameters. That's NOT what is happening here. > For unmapped - yes, either KEY_RESERVED or KEY_UNKNOWN should be > returned. For invalid scancodes -EINVAL shoudl be returned. Exactly my point. The scancode in question is 100% valid and mapable, yet the kernel is rejecting it as -EINVAL. Incorrect. BUG. Regression. Breaks userspace. Must get fixed. Cheers -- 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
