On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 11:25:34AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Jiri Kosina wrote: > >On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > >>In PS/2 mode it reports E0 32 which gets converted to keycode 150. In > >>USB mode it reports E0 02 which gets converted to keycode 172. > >>I don't know if it's the keyboard itself that's being inconsistent, or > >>if it is the table in usbkbd.c that's broken (in which case it should be > >>fixed to be consistent with the keyboard in PS/2 mode.) > > > >Hi Peter, > > > >First, usbkbd.c has very probably zero business with this - the mappings > >are being done in hid-input.c, usbkdb.c is only for embedded/debugging > >cases, and is almost never used on modern systems (see the corresponding > >Kconfig help text). > > > >>You seem to be of the opinion that "usb behaviour is correct", but don't > >>give any motivation why usb should take precedence. Offhand, I would > >>expect there to be fewer translation layers for PS/2 and would therefore > >>assume PS/2 is more inherently correct. > > > >For USB, we have Hid Usage Pages, which define this to be KEY_HOMEPAGE. > >There is no such specification for PS/2 though, so what Hans is proposing > >is to make it consistent with behavior of USB HID devices, which I agree > >with. > > Good to hear, so as everyone smees to agree, shall I write a (massive, > complex, intrusive) patch to fix this, or are there until now silent > parties that object?
Just don't forget to update the char/keyboard.c scancode synthesis table to generate e0 32 for keycode 172 instead for the current 150. -- Vojtech Pavlik Director SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
