Re: [PATCH 001/001] [Input:] Propagate hardware generated eventtimestamp to evdev.

[Michael Wright]

Apologies, forgot to make sure it was plain text.

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Michael Wright <michaelwr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> We already have MSC_TIMESTAMP (which is in usec), do you really need
>> nsec resolution?
>
> We don't actually need nsec resolution, usec resolution would be sufficient.
>
>
>> Why do you need this special handling? Can you simply have MSC_TIMESTAMP
>> to be delivered as part of the event packet and use it instead of the
>> event timestamp if userspace chooses to do so?
>
> We need stronger guarantees than MSC_TIMESTAMP gives us. Much of
> our system relies on the fact that timestamps produced by evdev are based on
> the systems monotonic clock, whereas MSC_TIMESTAMP provides no such
> guarantee.
> As for whether it's a MSC or SYN event, I don't think we really have
> preference.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
--
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/