Hi Sebastian, > Am 19.02.2017 um 21:15 schrieb Sebastian Reichel <sre@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Hi, > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 01:07:26PM +0100, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> I don't really remember when we noticed it first. Maybe it was >> back in tslib times some years ago where setting the sensitivity >> threshold made problems. We then carried along our patch for a >> long time in our local repo (and modified it several times) and >> only started upstreaming some months ago. [...] >> >> AFAIK, GIMP and for example https://sourceforge.net/projects/xournal/ appear >> to be able to handle X pressure, but I haven't running and tested either one >> on our devices. Pressure is used in such drawing tools to simulate that some >> physical pens make wider strokes on higher pressure. >> >> This seems to indicate that X can handle pressure in a non-boolean way, but rarely does. >> Especially I think the usual menu, click, drag, scroll gestures are only based >> on BTN_TOUCH status and not on ABS_PRESSURE. So it is rarely noticed to make >> a difference. > > ok. > >>>>> I suggest to put the resistance vs pressure thing in its own patch, >>>>> that also fixes tsc200x-core and merge it to linux-next after the >>>>> merge window. >> >> Ok. I will propose a patch. > > Thanks. I suggest to add this in the patch description: > > While this patch changes the values reported to userspace, > ABS_PRESSURE is used rarely by userspace. Most software only > relies on BTN_TOUCH (boolean), which is not affected by this > patch. Some graphics software makes use of the interface and > does not work correctly with the currently used inverted > behaviour. Added. Patch set will come in some minutes (have to run checkpatch first). BR and thanks, Nikolaus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
