On 12/23/2013 05:02 AM, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> I would like to know about the VT plans. Historically, keymap
> implementations are similar in the kernel and kbd project. I rewrote
> it in kbd. So, it can handle keycodes bigger than 255. In a kernel
> everything remained as before. I want to fix this part in a kernel. As
> pluses will be:
>
> * opportunity to define keycode > 255.
> * opportunity to reduce this table a kernel in most cases.
>
> I would like to ask your opinion about my plans because I heard about
> the thought of moving this functionality to user space.
>
> Whether it is worth starting so large-scale changes?
>
What I don't think we want to do is to make the current VT
implementation in the kernel significantly bigger. That is why
proposals to introduce bidirectionality or character shaping generally
have not been accepted. If you can improve functionality with a
*smaller* footprint, which you seem to imply above, then please, go ahead.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
