| Message ID | 20170824231153.8809-2-roderick@gaikai.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > > This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them > from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which > pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic > way of updating the heuristics. I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, unnecessary. > Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > --- > Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute > and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix > regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event > node. > > +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > +------------------------ > + > +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should > expose an > +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but > don't > +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be > updated, > +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > flag can > +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not updated so we should only show what we used to". > Guidelines > ========== > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h > b/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h > index 1798910..f6aac0e 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ > #define INPUT_PROP_TOPBUTTONPAD 0x04 /* > softbuttons at top of pad */ > #define INPUT_PROP_POINTING_STICK 0x05 /* is a > pointing stick */ > #define INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER 0x06 /* has > accelerometer */ > +#define INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE 0x07 /* hint to > ignore device by joydev */ > > #define INPUT_PROP_MAX 0x1f > #define INPUT_PROP_CNT (INPUT_PROP_MAX + 1) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic >> way of updating the heuristics. > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > unnecessary. > >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> --- >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event >> node. >> >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> +------------------------ >> + >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should >> expose an >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but >> don't >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be >> updated, >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> flag can >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not > updated so we should only show what we used to". > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a device with axes, but no buttons. Thanks, Roderick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi, On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> > >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them > >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which > >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic > >> way of updating the heuristics. > > > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for > > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > > unnecessary. > > > >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> --- > >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute > >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix > >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event > >> node. > >> > >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> +------------------------ > >> + > >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should > >> expose an > >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but > >> don't > >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be > >> updated, > >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> flag can > >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. > > > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here > > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device > > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not > > updated so we should only show what we used to". > > > > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, > because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which > axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason > thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering > out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons > etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications > to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine > if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a > string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a > device with axes, but no buttons. Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions to userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would userspace care to see this in device properties? Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the drivers, and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq handler? Or that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps up CPU frequency in response to user activity? If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some devices then the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across multiple drivers. Thanks.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: >> > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> >> >> >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them >> >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which >> >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic >> >> way of updating the heuristics. >> > >> > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for >> > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, >> > unnecessary. >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> >> --- >> >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ >> >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + >> >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 >> >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute >> >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). >> >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix >> >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event >> >> node. >> >> >> >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> >> +------------------------ >> >> + >> >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should >> >> expose an >> >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but >> >> don't >> >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be >> >> updated, >> >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> >> flag can >> >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. >> > >> > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here >> > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device >> > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not >> > updated so we should only show what we used to". >> > >> >> Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, >> because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which >> axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason >> thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering >> out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons >> etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications >> to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine >> if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a >> string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a >> device with axes, but no buttons. > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions to > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would userspace care > to see this in device properties? > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the drivers, > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq handler? Or > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps up > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some devices then > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across multiple > drivers. > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the patch add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and needed ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this flag not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the input_dev. In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to blacklist joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you felt was not narrow enough in scope. Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field to 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another solution you have in mind. Thanks, Roderick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: > >> > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> >> > >> >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them > >> >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which > >> >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic > >> >> way of updating the heuristics. > >> > > >> > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for > >> > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > >> > unnecessary. > >> > > >> >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> >> --- > >> >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > >> >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > >> >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > >> >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute > >> >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > >> >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix > >> >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event > >> >> node. > >> >> > >> >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> >> +------------------------ > >> >> + > >> >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should > >> >> expose an > >> >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but > >> >> don't > >> >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be > >> >> updated, > >> >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> >> flag can > >> >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. > >> > > >> > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here > >> > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device > >> > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not > >> > updated so we should only show what we used to". > >> > > >> > >> Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, > >> because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which > >> axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason > >> thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering > >> out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons > >> etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications > >> to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine > >> if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a > >> string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a > >> device with axes, but no buttons. > > > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions to > > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would userspace care > > to see this in device properties? > > > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the drivers, > > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might > > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq handler? Or > > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps up > > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > > > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some devices then > > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across multiple > > drivers. > > > > Thanks. > > > > -- > > Dmitry > > Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the patch > add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and needed > ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this flag > not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the > input_dev. > > In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to blacklist > joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough > information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you felt > was not narrow enough in scope. > > Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field to > 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another > solution you have in mind. What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with bus, vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have full access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, etc. Thanks.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov >> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> >> >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them >> >> >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which >> >> >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic >> >> >> way of updating the heuristics. >> >> > >> >> > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for >> >> > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, >> >> > unnecessary. >> >> > >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> >> >> >> --- >> >> >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ >> >> >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + >> >> >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 >> >> >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> >> >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute >> >> >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). >> >> >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix >> >> >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event >> >> >> node. >> >> >> >> >> >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> >> >> +------------------------ >> >> >> + >> >> >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should >> >> >> expose an >> >> >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but >> >> >> don't >> >> >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be >> >> >> updated, >> >> >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> >> >> flag can >> >> >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. >> >> > >> >> > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here >> >> > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device >> >> > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not >> >> > updated so we should only show what we used to". >> >> > >> >> >> >> Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, >> >> because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which >> >> axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason >> >> thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering >> >> out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons >> >> etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications >> >> to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine >> >> if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a >> >> string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a >> >> device with axes, but no buttons. >> > >> > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions to >> > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would userspace care >> > to see this in device properties? >> > >> > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the drivers, >> > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might >> > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq handler? Or >> > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps up >> > CPU frequency in response to user activity? >> > >> > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some devices then >> > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across multiple >> > drivers. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > -- >> > Dmitry >> >> Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the patch >> add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and needed >> ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this flag >> not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the >> input_dev. >> >> In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to blacklist >> joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough >> information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you felt >> was not narrow enough in scope. >> >> Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field to >> 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another >> solution you have in mind. > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with bus, > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have full > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, etc. > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, which I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 DS3 ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite some logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this device knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. Thanks, Roderick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 15:02 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hades > > > > > s.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.c > > > > > > > om> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new property can be set on input devices to > > > > > > > blacklist them > > > > > > > from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for > > > > > > > devices, which > > > > > > > pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no > > > > > > > good generic > > > > > > > way of updating the heuristics. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the > > > > > > possessive for > > > > > > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > > > > > > unnecessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrand > > > > > > > er@sony.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > > > > > > > include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational > > > > > > > axes (absolute > > > > > > > and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > > > > > > > All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not > > > > > > > mix > > > > > > > regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the > > > > > > > same event > > > > > > > node. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > +------------------------ > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine > > > > > > > whether it should > > > > > > > expose an > > > > > > > +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its > > > > > > > heuristics, but > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic > > > > > > > heuristics can be > > > > > > > updated, > > > > > > > +but in other cases this is not easy. The > > > > > > > INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > flag can > > > > > > > +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by > > > > > > > joydev. > > > > > > > > > > > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying > > > > > > to do here > > > > > > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show > > > > > > this device > > > > > > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and > > > > > > usually not > > > > > > updated so we should only show what we used to". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like > > > > > this, > > > > > because I thought joydev applications could not determine at > > > > > all which > > > > > axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that > > > > > reason > > > > > thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. > > > > > filtering > > > > > out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has > > > > > buttons > > > > > etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow > > > > > applications > > > > > to get more information about a device, but you can't easily > > > > > determine > > > > > if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to > > > > > do a > > > > > string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you > > > > > see a > > > > > device with axes, but no buttons. > > > > > > > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions > > > > to > > > > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would > > > > userspace care > > > > to see this in device properties? > > > > > > > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the > > > > drivers, > > > > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might > > > > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq > > > > handler? Or > > > > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps > > > > up > > > > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > > > > > > > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some > > > > devices then > > > > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across > > > > multiple > > > > drivers. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dmitry > > > > > > Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the > > > patch > > > add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and > > > needed > > > ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this > > > flag > > > not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the > > > input_dev. > > > > > > In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to > > > blacklist > > > joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough > > > information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you > > > felt > > > was not narrow enough in scope. > > > > > > Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field > > > to > > > 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another > > > solution you have in mind. > > > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with > > bus, > > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have > > full > > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, > > etc. > > > > Thanks. > > > > -- > > Dmitry > > > Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the > information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, > which > I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 DS3 > ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the > motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite some > logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this device > knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. Apart from the fact that the INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE property is made visible in user-space (it could be there as a debug mechanism to show why the device is not exported through joydev), I think having the device driver tell joydev not to export it is the right mechanism. The problem of devices having sub-components exported through joydev should only exist when 1) the device driver is extended to be more capable (like the DS4 accelerometers), 2) the device driver is extended to support more hardware (whether a simple vid/pid combination, or something more involved) 3) new device drivers are added. joydev changes are thus kept to a minimum, the drivers (and their changes) are self-sufficient. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 03:02:16PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > >> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net> wrote: > >> >> > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > >> >> >> From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> This new property can be set on input devices to blacklist them > >> >> >> from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for devices, which > >> >> >> pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no good generic > >> >> >> way of updating the heuristics. > >> >> > > >> >> > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the possessive for > >> >> > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > >> >> > unnecessary. > >> >> > > >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.com> > >> >> >> --- > >> >> >> Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > >> >> >> include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > >> >> >> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> >> b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> >> index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > >> >> >> --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> >> +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > >> >> >> @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute > >> >> >> and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > >> >> >> All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix > >> >> >> regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event > >> >> >> node. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> >> >> +------------------------ > >> >> >> + > >> >> >> +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should > >> >> >> expose an > >> >> >> +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but > >> >> >> don't > >> >> >> +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be > >> >> >> updated, > >> >> >> +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > >> >> >> flag can > >> >> >> +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. > >> >> > > >> >> > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying to do here > >> >> > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show this device > >> >> > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and usually not > >> >> > updated so we should only show what we used to". > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like this, > >> >> because I thought joydev applications could not determine at all which > >> >> axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that reason > >> >> thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. filtering > >> >> out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has buttons > >> >> etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow applications > >> >> to get more information about a device, but you can't easily determine > >> >> if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to do a > >> >> string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you see a > >> >> device with axes, but no buttons. > >> > > >> > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions to > >> > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would userspace care > >> > to see this in device properties? > >> > > >> > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the drivers, > >> > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might > >> > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq handler? Or > >> > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps up > >> > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > >> > > >> > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some devices then > >> > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across multiple > >> > drivers. > >> > > >> > Thanks. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Dmitry > >> > >> Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the patch > >> add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and needed > >> ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this flag > >> not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the > >> input_dev. > >> > >> In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to blacklist > >> joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough > >> information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you felt > >> was not narrow enough in scope. > >> > >> Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field to > >> 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another > >> solution you have in mind. > > > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with bus, > > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have full > > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, etc. > > > > Thanks. > > > > -- > > Dmitry > > > Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the > information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, which > I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 DS3 > ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the > motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite some > logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this device > knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. I believe conceptually this would be wrong, as it would push the knowledge of existing interfaces into the drivers. So just use input ID (and I guess you need to parse phys a bit to see which device you want to handle and which to ignore). Thanks.
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:08:08AM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 15:02 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hades > > > > > > s.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.c > > > > > > > > om> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new property can be set on input devices to > > > > > > > > blacklist them > > > > > > > > from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for > > > > > > > > devices, which > > > > > > > > pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no > > > > > > > > good generic > > > > > > > > way of updating the heuristics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the > > > > > > > possessive for > > > > > > > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, > > > > > > > unnecessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrand > > > > > > > > er@sony.com> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > > > > > > > > include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational > > > > > > > > axes (absolute > > > > > > > > and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > > > > > > > > All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not > > > > > > > > mix > > > > > > > > regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the > > > > > > > > same event > > > > > > > > node. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > > +------------------------ > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine > > > > > > > > whether it should > > > > > > > > expose an > > > > > > > > +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its > > > > > > > > heuristics, but > > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic > > > > > > > > heuristics can be > > > > > > > > updated, > > > > > > > > +but in other cases this is not easy. The > > > > > > > > INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > > flag can > > > > > > > > +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by > > > > > > > > joydev. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying > > > > > > > to do here > > > > > > > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show > > > > > > > this device > > > > > > > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and > > > > > > > usually not > > > > > > > updated so we should only show what we used to". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like > > > > > > this, > > > > > > because I thought joydev applications could not determine at > > > > > > all which > > > > > > axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that > > > > > > reason > > > > > > thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. > > > > > > filtering > > > > > > out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has > > > > > > buttons > > > > > > etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow > > > > > > applications > > > > > > to get more information about a device, but you can't easily > > > > > > determine > > > > > > if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to > > > > > > do a > > > > > > string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you > > > > > > see a > > > > > > device with axes, but no buttons. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions > > > > > to > > > > > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would > > > > > userspace care > > > > > to see this in device properties? > > > > > > > > > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the > > > > > drivers, > > > > > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might > > > > > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq > > > > > handler? Or > > > > > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps > > > > > up > > > > > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > > > > > > > > > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some > > > > > devices then > > > > > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across > > > > > multiple > > > > > drivers. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Dmitry > > > > > > > > Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the > > > > patch > > > > add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and > > > > needed > > > > ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this > > > > flag > > > > not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the > > > > input_dev. > > > > > > > > In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to > > > > blacklist > > > > joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough > > > > information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you > > > > felt > > > > was not narrow enough in scope. > > > > > > > > Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field > > > > to > > > > 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another > > > > solution you have in mind. > > > > > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with > > > bus, > > > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have > > > full > > > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, > > > etc. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > -- > > > Dmitry > > > > > > Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the > > information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, > > which > > I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 DS3 > > ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the > > motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite some > > logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this device > > knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. > > Apart from the fact that the INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE property is made > visible in user-space (it could be there as a debug mechanism to show > why the device is not exported through joydev), I think having the > device driver tell joydev not to export it is the right mechanism. > > The problem of devices having sub-components exported through joydev > should only exist when 1) the device driver is extended to be more > capable (like the DS4 accelerometers), 2) the device driver is extended > to support more hardware (whether a simple vid/pid combination, or > something more involved) 3) new device drivers are added. > > joydev changes are thus kept to a minimum, the drivers (and their > changes) are self-sufficient. What will happen if there is joydev2? Or some other interface (input handler) that you decide should not bind to certain devices? The handlers need to decide what to do with input devices, and input driver should only expose the capabilities/caracteristics/whatever. So "composite" property is good (and I am open to looking into how we can help userspace identify all parts of composite device, maybe just convention on "phys" format will work well enough), and maybe "leader" device property is also acceptable, but "ignore joydev", "ignore cpufreq", "ignore sysrq", "ignore cpuboost" is not. Thanks.
On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 15:16 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:08:08AM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 15:02 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > > > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick > > > > > > Colenbrander > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@h > > > > > > > ades > > > > > > > s.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick > > > > > > > > Colenbrander > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@so > > > > > > > > > ny.c > > > > > > > > > om> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new property can be set on input devices to > > > > > > > > > blacklist them > > > > > > > > > from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for > > > > > > > > > devices, which > > > > > > > > > pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no > > > > > > > > > good generic > > > > > > > > > way of updating the heuristics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the > > > > > > > > possessive for > > > > > > > > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, > > > > > > > > IMO, > > > > > > > > unnecessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander > > > > > > > > > <roderick.colenbrand > > > > > > > > > er@sony.com> > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ > > > > > > > > > include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > > b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > > index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 > > > > > > > > > --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst > > > > > > > > > @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the > > > > > > > > > rotational > > > > > > > > > axes (absolute > > > > > > > > > and/or relative rx, ry, rz). > > > > > > > > > All other axes retain their meaning. A device must > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > mix > > > > > > > > > regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > same event > > > > > > > > > node. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > > > +------------------------ > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine > > > > > > > > > whether it should > > > > > > > > > expose an > > > > > > > > > +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its > > > > > > > > > heuristics, but > > > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > > +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic > > > > > > > > > heuristics can be > > > > > > > > > updated, > > > > > > > > > +but in other cases this is not easy. The > > > > > > > > > INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE > > > > > > > > > flag can > > > > > > > > > +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > joydev. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're > > > > > > > > trying > > > > > > > > to do here > > > > > > > > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show > > > > > > > > this device > > > > > > > > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > usually not > > > > > > > > updated so we should only show what we used to". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > this, > > > > > > > because I thought joydev applications could not determine > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > all which > > > > > > > axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. > > > > > > > filtering > > > > > > > out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > buttons > > > > > > > etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow > > > > > > > applications > > > > > > > to get more information about a device, but you can't > > > > > > > easily > > > > > > > determine > > > > > > > if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > do a > > > > > > > string compare on known strings or make assumptions if > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > see a > > > > > > > device with axes, but no buttons. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel > > > > > > decisions > > > > > > to > > > > > > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would > > > > > > userspace care > > > > > > to see this in device properties? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into > > > > > > the > > > > > > drivers, > > > > > > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel > > > > > > might > > > > > > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq > > > > > > handler? Or > > > > > > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that > > > > > > bumps > > > > > > up > > > > > > CPU frequency in response to user activity? > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some > > > > > > devices then > > > > > > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across > > > > > > multiple > > > > > > drivers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Dmitry > > > > > > > > > > Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally > > > > > the > > > > > patch > > > > > add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded > > > > > and > > > > > needed > > > > > ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but > > > > > this > > > > > flag > > > > > not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the > > > > > input_dev. > > > > > > > > > > In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to > > > > > blacklist > > > > > joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough > > > > > information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think > > > > > you > > > > > felt > > > > > was not narrow enough in scope. > > > > > > > > > > Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags > > > > > field > > > > > to > > > > > 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there > > > > > another > > > > > solution you have in mind. > > > > > > > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with > > > > bus, > > > > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have > > > > full > > > > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, > > > > phys, > > > > etc. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dmitry > > > > > > > > > Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the > > > information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, > > > which > > > I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 > > > DS3 > > > ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the > > > motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite > > > some > > > logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this > > > device > > > knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. > > > > Apart from the fact that the INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE property is > > made > > visible in user-space (it could be there as a debug mechanism to > > show > > why the device is not exported through joydev), I think having the > > device driver tell joydev not to export it is the right mechanism. > > > > The problem of devices having sub-components exported through > > joydev > > should only exist when 1) the device driver is extended to be more > > capable (like the DS4 accelerometers), 2) the device driver is > > extended > > to support more hardware (whether a simple vid/pid combination, or > > something more involved) 3) new device drivers are added. > > > > joydev changes are thus kept to a minimum, the drivers (and their > > changes) are self-sufficient. > > What will happen if there is joydev2? Or some other interface (input > handler) that you decide should not bind to certain devices? > > The handlers need to decide what to do with input devices, and input > driver should only expose the capabilities/caracteristics/whatever. > So > "composite" property is good (and I am open to looking into how we > can > help userspace identify all parts of composite device, maybe just > convention on "phys" format will work well enough), and maybe > "leader" > device property is also acceptable, but "ignore joydev", "ignore > cpufreq", "ignore sysrq", "ignore cpuboost" is not. "slippery slope" argument doesn't work here. "joydev" is a compatibility interface. If there weren't any old applications relying on it, we'd probably want to remove it. The reason why we need to make those changes in the first place is because we cannot change the user- space, and that user-space gets confused by new capabilities in devices. But up to you, your code to maintain in the long run. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:08:08AM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: >> On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 15:02 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Dmitry Torokhov >> > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander >> > > wrote: >> > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Dmitry Torokhov >> > > > <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > Hi, >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:08:54PM -0700, Roderick Colenbrander >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Bastien Nocera <hadess@hades >> > > > > > s.net> wrote: >> > > > > > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 16:11 -0700, Roderick Colenbrander >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > From: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrander@sony.c >> > > > > > > > om> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > This new property can be set on input devices to >> > > > > > > > blacklist them >> > > > > > > > from getting picked up by joydev. This is meant for >> > > > > > > > devices, which >> > > > > > > > pass joydev its heuristics, but for which there is no >> > > > > > > > good generic >> > > > > > > > way of updating the heuristics. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I can't make sense of that last sentence, and the >> > > > > > > possessive for >> > > > > > > "heuristics" (here and below in the documentation) is, IMO, >> > > > > > > unnecessary. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roderick Colenbrander <roderick.colenbrand >> > > > > > > > er@sony.com> >> > > > > > > > --- >> > > > > > > > Documentation/input/event-codes.rst | 9 +++++++++ >> > > > > > > > include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h | 1 + >> > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> > > > > > > > b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> > > > > > > > index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 >> > > > > > > > --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst >> > > > > > > > @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational >> > > > > > > > axes (absolute >> > > > > > > > and/or relative rx, ry, rz). >> > > > > > > > All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not >> > > > > > > > mix >> > > > > > > > regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the >> > > > > > > > same event >> > > > > > > > node. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> > > > > > > > +------------------------ >> > > > > > > > + >> > > > > > > > +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine >> > > > > > > > whether it should >> > > > > > > > expose an >> > > > > > > > +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its >> > > > > > > > heuristics, but >> > > > > > > > don't >> > > > > > > > +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic >> > > > > > > > heuristics can be >> > > > > > > > updated, >> > > > > > > > +but in other cases this is not easy. The >> > > > > > > > INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE >> > > > > > > > flag can >> > > > > > > > +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by >> > > > > > > > joydev. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > The "don't make sense to expose" is not what we're trying >> > > > > > > to do here >> > > > > > > though. The problem is rather that "we used not to show >> > > > > > > this device >> > > > > > > through joydev, but programs using joydev are limited and >> > > > > > > usually not >> > > > > > > updated so we should only show what we used to". >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, I will change the wording. Originally I wrote it like >> > > > > > this, >> > > > > > because I thought joydev applications could not determine at >> > > > > > all which >> > > > > > axes were being used except for 'an axis number' and for that >> > > > > > reason >> > > > > > thought that the match function had some heuristics (e.g. >> > > > > > filtering >> > > > > > out touchpad devices and others), making sure a joystick has >> > > > > > buttons >> > > > > > etcetera. I wasn't aware of JSIOCGAXMAP, which does allow >> > > > > > applications >> > > > > > to get more information about a device, but you can't easily >> > > > > > determine >> > > > > > if something is e.g. a motion sensor device you would need to >> > > > > > do a >> > > > > > string compare on known strings or make assumptions if you >> > > > > > see a >> > > > > > device with axes, but no buttons. >> > > > > >> > > > > Sorry for the delay, but exposing the internal kernel decisions >> > > > > to >> > > > > userspace is not something that we need to do. Why would >> > > > > userspace care >> > > > > to see this in device properties? >> > > > > >> > > > > Also, this whole thing puts knowledge of interfaces into the >> > > > > drivers, >> > > > > and driver should not care at all what interfaces kernel might >> > > > > implement. Do drivers need to be aware that there is SysRq >> > > > > handler? Or >> > > > > that on some versions of ChromeOS there is a handler that bumps >> > > > > up >> > > > > CPU frequency in response to user activity? >> > > > > >> > > > > If you really want to stop joydev from attaching to some >> > > > > devices then >> > > > > the decision should go in joydev itself, not spread across >> > > > > multiple >> > > > > drivers. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks. >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Dmitry >> > > > >> > > > Correct user space should not have to be aware. Originally the >> > > > patch >> > > > add a composite device flag, but that term was more loaded and >> > > > needed >> > > > ioctls. That field would have made sense for user space, but this >> > > > flag >> > > > not, we just piggy-backed on the the properties field in the >> > > > input_dev. >> > > > >> > > > In my case of ds3/ds4 to fix old applications, I want to >> > > > blacklist >> > > > joydev in some way, but joydev doesn't have access to enough >> > > > information except for INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER which I think you >> > > > felt >> > > > was not narrow enough in scope. >> > > > >> > > > Would the solution be to add some new private quirks/flags field >> > > > to >> > > > 'struct input_dev', which joydev could use? Or is there another >> > > > solution you have in mind. >> > > >> > > What kind of data joydev is missing? There is the input_id with >> > > bus, >> > > vendor, product and version, device capabilities, plus you have >> > > full >> > > access to the input device itself, so you can look up name, phys, >> > > etc. >> > > >> > > Thanks. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Dmitry >> > >> > >> > Thanks for getting back so quickly. The input_dev has all the >> > information as you could do something with product / vendor ids, >> > which >> > I wanted to avoid as there are 5 DS4 ids I need to handle and 2 DS3 >> > ids. We still want to expose the 'gamepad' subdevice, but not the >> > motion device (INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER), so it would be quite some >> > logic. Overall I thought it would be cleaner to not have this device >> > knowledge in joydev and maybe expose a new flag. >> >> Apart from the fact that the INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE property is made >> visible in user-space (it could be there as a debug mechanism to show >> why the device is not exported through joydev), I think having the >> device driver tell joydev not to export it is the right mechanism. >> >> The problem of devices having sub-components exported through joydev >> should only exist when 1) the device driver is extended to be more >> capable (like the DS4 accelerometers), 2) the device driver is extended >> to support more hardware (whether a simple vid/pid combination, or >> something more involved) 3) new device drivers are added. >> >> joydev changes are thus kept to a minimum, the drivers (and their >> changes) are self-sufficient. > > What will happen if there is joydev2? Or some other interface (input > handler) that you decide should not bind to certain devices? > > The handlers need to decide what to do with input devices, and input > driver should only expose the capabilities/caracteristics/whatever. So > "composite" property is good (and I am open to looking into how we can > help userspace identify all parts of composite device, maybe just > convention on "phys" format will work well enough), and maybe "leader" > device property is also acceptable, but "ignore joydev", "ignore > cpufreq", "ignore sysrq", "ignore cpuboost" is not. > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry I understand the design from your perspective in that it should be the handlers, which should make decisions on what devices to support or not. The original patch added INPUT_PROP_COMPOSITE to allow joydev to do 'INPUT_PROP_COMPOSITE && INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER'. Do you consider this new flag a proper stepping stone towards to a complete solution in where we also allow to query 'sibling devices'? If so I can resubmit the patch as it would really help with our users on upcoming distributions. Thanks, Roderick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst index a8c0873..ae8c546 100644 --- a/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst +++ b/Documentation/input/event-codes.rst @@ -356,6 +356,15 @@ can report through the rotational axes (absolute and/or relative rx, ry, rz). All other axes retain their meaning. A device must not mix regular directional axes and accelerometer axes on the same event node. +INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE +------------------------ + +The joydev interface uses heuristics to determine whether it should expose an +input device through joydev. Some devices pass its heuristics, but don't +make sense to expose. In some cases the generic heuristics can be updated, +but in other cases this is not easy. The INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE flag can +be set by drivers to explicit request blacklisting by joydev. + Guidelines ========== diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h b/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h index 1798910..f6aac0e 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/input-event-codes.h @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ #define INPUT_PROP_TOPBUTTONPAD 0x04 /* softbuttons at top of pad */ #define INPUT_PROP_POINTING_STICK 0x05 /* is a pointing stick */ #define INPUT_PROP_ACCELEROMETER 0x06 /* has accelerometer */ +#define INPUT_PROP_JOYDEV_IGNORE 0x07 /* hint to ignore device by joydev */ #define INPUT_PROP_MAX 0x1f #define INPUT_PROP_CNT (INPUT_PROP_MAX + 1)