Re: 2.6.36/2.6.37: broken compatibility with userspace input-utils ?
From: Dmitry Torokhov
Date: Wed Jan 26 2011 - 11:44:15 EST
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 10:05:57AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> On 11-01-25 09:00 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 03:29:14PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 05:22:09PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> >>> On 11-01-25 05:00 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> >>>> Em 25-01-2011 18:54, Dmitry Torokhov escreveu:
> >>>>> That has been done as well; we have 2 new ioctls and kept 2 old ioctls.
> >>> That's the problem: you did NOT keep the two old ioctls().
> >>> Those got changed too.. so now we have four NEW ioctls(),
> >>> none of which backward compatible with userspace.
> >> Please calm down. This, in fact, is not new vs old ioctl problem but
> >> rather particular driver (or rather set of drivers) implementation
> >> issue. Even if we drop the new ioctls and convert the RC code to use the
> >> old ones you'd be observing the same breakage as RC code responds with
> >> -EINVAL to not-yet-established mappings.
> >> I'll see what can be done for these drivers; I guess we could supply a
> >> fake KEY_RESERVED entry for not mapped scancodes if there are mapped
> >> scancodes "above" current one. That should result in the same behavior
> >> for RCs as before.
> > I wonder if the patch below is all that is needed...
> Nope. Does not work here:
> $ lsinput
> protocol version mismatch (expected 65536, got 65537)
It would be much more helpful if you tried to test what has been fixed
(hint: version change wasn't it).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/