Hi, On 4/15/24 9:35 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 02:30:35PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi Dmitry, >> >> On 4/11/24 2:02 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 10:17:05PM -0400, Mark Pearson wrote: >>>> Hi Dmitry >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2024, at 9:20 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:47:05PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 03:23:52PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: >>>>>>> On 09/04/2024 09:31, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 05:07:58PM -0400, Mark Pearson wrote: >>>>>>>>> Add support for new input events on Lenovo laptops that need exporting to >>>>>>>>> user space. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Lenovo trackpoints are adding the ability to generate a doubletap event. >>>>>>>>> Add a new keycode to allow this to be used by userspace. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What is the intended meaning of this keycode? How does it differ from >>>>>>>> the driver sending BTN_LEFT press/release twice? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Lenovo support is using FN+N with Windows to collect needed details for >>>>>>>>> support cases. Add a keycode so that we'll be able to provide similar >>>>>>>>> support on Linux. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is there a userspace consumer for this? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Funnily enough XKB has had a keysym for this for decades but it's not >>>>>>> hooked up anywhere due to the way it's pointer keys accessibility >>>>>>> feature was implemented. Theory is that most of userspace just needs >>>>>>> to patch the various pieces together for the new evdev code + keysym, >>>>>>> it's not really any different to handling a volume key (except this >>>>>>> one needs to be assignable). >>>>>> >>>>>> What is the keysym? If we can make them relatable to each other that >>>>>> would be good. Or maybe we could find a matching usage from HID usage >>>>>> tables... >>>>> >>>>> I was looking through the existing codes and I see: >>>>> >>>>> #define KEY_INFO 0x166 /* AL OEM Features/Tips/Tutorial */ >>>>> >>>>> We also have KEY_VENDOR used in a few drivers/plafrom/x86, including >>>>> thinkkpad_acpi.c and I wonder if it would be suitable for this vendor >>>>> specific debug info collection application (which I honestly doubt will >>>>> materialize). >>>>> >>>> >>>> That's a somewhat disappointing note on your doubts, is that based on >>>> anything? Just wondering what we've done to deserve that criticism. >>> >>> Sorry, this was not meant as a criticism really, but you mentioned >>> yourself that there isn't anything in the works yet, you just have some >>> plans. >>> >>> For such a project to succeed Lenovo needs to invest into selling >>> devices with Linux as a primary operating system, and it has to be >>> consumer segment (or small business, because for corporate they >>> typically roll their own support channels). The case of retrofitting >>> Linux onto a that device originally came with Windows OS rarely gets >>> much if any response from the normal support channels. >>> >>> Is this something that is actually happening? >> >> Yes, Lenovo is actually offering Fedora as an OS choice when >> ordering ThinkPads directly from their website in many countries >> including when ordering as a consumer. > > Ah, very nice, I was not aware of this. > >> >> And unlike other vendor's Linux preloads which often use a kernel >> with downstream laptop specific changes these laptops are running >> unmodified Fedora kernels, which themselves are almost pristine >> upstream kernels. >> >> Lenovo (Mark) has been really good the last couple of years in >> making sure that their hw just works with mainline kernels without >> any downstream vendor specific patches. >> >>>> That aside, I guess KEY_INFO or KEY_VENDOR could be a good fit (I >>>> personally don't think KEY_CONFIG matches well), but I would be >>>> worried about clashing with existing functionality. >> >> Using KEY_INFO / KEY_VENDOR works for me too. So maybe we should >> just go with one of those 2 ? > > It looks like Mark's preference is KEY_VENDOR, so let's go with it? Ack KEY_VENDOR sounds good to me for the doubletap on the trackpoint event. What about the new Fn + N keycombo which also generates a WMI event which we want to translate to a key code to launch a (to be written) debug-info collecting app for when the customer calls Lenovo support. Mark suggested a new KEY_SYS_DEBUG_INFO for that. So do we use: #define KEY_INFO 0x166 /* AL OEM Features/Tips/Tutorial */ for this, or do we define a new keycode ? Mark would using KEY_INFO for this work for you. Dmitry any opinion on this ? Regards, Hans
