On Thursday 05 April 2007 10:23, Karl Pickett wrote:
> Dmitry, please use this instead of my previous patch. Thanks to
> Vincent for the code review , fixes, and testing.
>
Applied to the input tree; thank you Karl and Vincent.
--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscr
Dmitry, please use this instead of my previous patch. Thanks to
Vincent for the code review , fixes, and testing.
ati_remote causes repeats after only .23 seconds with my remote and
makes it hard to use comfortably. Make a precise way of setting the
repeat delay time in milliseconds and default
On 4/4/07, Vincent Vanackere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/4/07, Éric Piel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 04/04/2007 10:52 PM, Vincent Vanackere wrote/a écrit:
> > +unsigned long first_jiffies;
> space warning!
>
> Sorry for being annoying ;-)
> Eric
>
Indeed you are8-)
On 4/4/07, Éric Piel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
04/04/2007 10:52 PM, Vincent Vanackere wrote/a écrit:
> +unsigned long first_jiffies;
space warning!
Sorry for being annoying ;-)
Eric
Indeed you are8-)
... new version attached ...
Best regards,
Vincent
--- drivers/us
04/04/2007 10:52 PM, Vincent Vanackere wrote/a écrit:
:
I'm attaching a very small adaptation of your patch (re-added the
repeat_count check and a small comment, compile & run-time tested).
Works fine for me...
--- drivers/usb/input/ati_remote.c.orig 2007-04-04 22:05:10.0 +0200
+++ dr
On 4/4/07, Karl Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would this be more acceptable? I haven't compiled or tested yet..but
you can see what I'm trying to do.. make the delay time based instead
of implementation/count based...
Well, I was going to submit a similar patch so I'd say that's the
right
Would this be more acceptable? I haven't compiled or tested yet..but
you can see what I'm trying to do.. make the delay time based instead
of implementation/count based...
Signed-off-by: Karl Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- ./ati_remote.c.kjp 2007-04-04 10:56:20.0 -0400
+++ ./ati_remot
Here is some more output...
[300950.438977] drivers/usb/input/ati_remote.c: Registered USB driver
ATI/X10 RF USB Remote Control v. 2.2.1
[300950.445902] drivers/usb/input/ati_remote.c: Weird data, len=1 ff
54 1f 60 13 20 ... (I only get that once, at startup)
Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0bc7:0004 X10
On 4/4/07, Éric Piel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This default value is set to 300 ms. On my Xserver, the default value is
660 ms and by default in my distrib it's set to 500 ms. So, indeed, the
default value of the ati_remote is quite small. Maybe you could increase
FILTER_MAX to 10 (= 600 ms) in
04/04/2007 02:34 AM, Karl Pickett wrote/a écrit:
The ati_remote driver is a little too sensitive for my wife... if you
do anything but barely tap the button you can get multiple events
reported. We prefer a more conservative no-repeat setting. This is a
pretty trivial patch which just makes one
Hi Karl,
On Tuesday 03 April 2007 20:34, Karl Pickett wrote:
> The ati_remote driver is a little too sensitive for my wife... if you
> do anything but barely tap the button you can get multiple events
> reported. We prefer a more conservative no-repeat setting. This is a
> pretty trivial patch w
The ati_remote driver is a little too sensitive for my wife... if you
do anything but barely tap the button you can get multiple events
reported. We prefer a more conservative no-repeat setting. This is a
pretty trivial patch which just makes one hard coded value soft
configurable and does not c
12 matches
Mail list logo
