Re: [PATCH] Input: Support for a less exclusive grab.

[Zephaniah E. Hull]

On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:40:31AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the
> > > > > device at all.
> > > > 
> > > > We have to disable the legacy input handlers somehow, not doing so
> > > > simply isn't an option.
> > > 
> > > I do not follow. If user's xorg.conf does not use /dev/input/mice and
> > > does not use "kbd" driver then grabbing is not required, is it? Now,
> > > as far as I understand, lack of hotplug support in X is the main
> > > obstacle for removing "mouse" and "kbd" drivers, correct?
> > 
> > Sadly, not quite.
> > 
> > The problem is that if the user is not using the mouse and kbd drivers
> > at all, but is instead using xf86-input-evdev, and no grabbing is done,
> > then all key presses end up going to the console.
> 
> X still switches to its own VT, so those keys go to the X server via the
> console, and GPM also knows about console switching ...
> 
> That is a sane way how to prevent the regular console from getting
> keypresses/mouse movements.

Not really, what happens when the user presses alt-F1?  A way to tell
the kernel that events from a given input device should not go to the
console has been needed since the very first time an X driver allowed
keyboard events from /dev/input/event<n>, and that still has not
changed.

We just want a more flexible approach then what we are already using[0].

I'll see about writing something up when I get back to my computers[1]
and have things set back up[2].

Zephaniah E. Hull.

0: EVIOCGRAB.
1: The night of the 10th.
2: It could be a few days after I get back.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature