Hi Oleksandr, On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 05:40:29PM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > @@ -211,93 +220,114 @@ static int xenkbd_probe(struct xenbus_device *dev, > if (!info->page) > goto error_nomem; > > - /* Set input abs params to match backend screen res */ > - abs = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->otherend, > - XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_ABS_POINTER, 0); > - ptr_size[KPARAM_X] = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->otherend, > - XENKBD_FIELD_WIDTH, > - ptr_size[KPARAM_X]); > - ptr_size[KPARAM_Y] = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->otherend, > - XENKBD_FIELD_HEIGHT, > - ptr_size[KPARAM_Y]); > - if (abs) { > - ret = xenbus_write(XBT_NIL, dev->nodename, > - XENKBD_FIELD_REQ_ABS_POINTER, "1"); > - if (ret) { > - pr_warn("xenkbd: can't request abs-pointer\n"); > - abs = 0; > - } > - } > + /* > + * The below are reverse logic, e.g. if the feature is set, then > + * do not expose the corresponding virtual device. > + */ > + with_kbd = !xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->nodename, > + XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_DSBL_KEYBRD, 0); > > - touch = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->nodename, > - XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_MTOUCH, 0); > - if (touch) { > + with_ptr = !xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->nodename, > + XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_DSBL_POINTER, 0); > + > + /* Direct logic: if set, then create multi-touch device. */ > + with_mtouch = xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->nodename, > + XENKBD_FIELD_FEAT_MTOUCH, 0); > + if (with_mtouch) { > ret = xenbus_write(XBT_NIL, dev->nodename, > XENKBD_FIELD_REQ_MTOUCH, "1"); > if (ret) { > pr_warn("xenkbd: can't request multi-touch"); > - touch = 0; > + with_mtouch = 0; > } > } Does it make sense to still end up calling xenkbd_connect_backend() when all interfaces (keyboard, pointer, and multitouch) are disabled? Should we do: if (!(with_kbd || || with_ptr || with_mtouch)) return -ENXIO; ? Thanks. -- 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