On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 09:40:30PM +0100, Sean Young wrote:
>On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 06:10:06PM +0200, David Härdeman wrote:
>> Obvious fix, leave repeat handling to rc-core
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Härdeman <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c | 10 +++-------
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c b/drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c
>> index 3ce850314dca..75b9137f6faf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/ir-nec-decoder.c
>> @@ -88,13 +88,9 @@ static int ir_nec_decode(struct rc_dev *dev, struct ir_raw_event ev)
>> data->state = STATE_BIT_PULSE;
>> return 0;
>> } else if (eq_margin(ev.duration, NEC_REPEAT_SPACE, NEC_UNIT / 2)) {
>> - if (!dev->keypressed) {
>> - IR_dprintk(1, "Discarding last key repeat: event after key up\n");
>> - } else {
>> - rc_repeat(dev);
>> - IR_dprintk(1, "Repeat last key\n");
>> - data->state = STATE_TRAILER_PULSE;
>> - }
>> + rc_repeat(dev);
>> + IR_dprintk(1, "Repeat last key\n");
>> + data->state = STATE_TRAILER_PULSE;
>
>This is not correct. This means that whenever a nec repeat is received,
>the last scancode is sent to the input device, irrespective of whether
>there has been no IR for hours. The original code is stricter.
I think that'd be an argument for moving the check to rc_repeat().
But, on the other hand, sending an input scancode for each repeat event
seems kind of pointless, doesn't it? If so, it might make more sense to
just remove the input event generation from rc_repeat() altogether...
--
David Härdeman
