On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 02:28:07PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > We don't want touches in the button area to cause the pointer to move, add > a tp_button_touch_active function which the main code in evdev-mt-touchpad > can call to see if a touch should be consider a candidate for being the > pointer, should be taken into account for 2 finger scrolling, etc. > > The idea behind the main code polling for this is that in the future with > ie edge scrolling we will have another independent state machine, which > may also want to block a touch from being the pointer, so it is best for > the main code to test all independent state machines, rather then having > the state-machines poke the is_pointer variabel directly. > > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> > --- > src/evdev-mt-touchpad-buttons.c | 5 +++++ > src/evdev-mt-touchpad.h | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/evdev-mt-touchpad-buttons.c b/src/evdev-mt-touchpad-buttons.c > index f953cd1..e789a87 100644 > --- a/src/evdev-mt-touchpad-buttons.c > +++ b/src/evdev-mt-touchpad-buttons.c > @@ -602,3 +602,8 @@ tp_post_button_events(struct tp_dispatch *tp, uint32_t > time) > return rc; > } > > +int > +tp_button_touch_active(struct tp_dispatch *tp, struct tp_touch *t) > +{ > + return t->button.state == BUTTON_STATE_AREA; > +} > diff --git a/src/evdev-mt-touchpad.h b/src/evdev-mt-touchpad.h > index 8d8dd84..04da6a6 100644 > --- a/src/evdev-mt-touchpad.h > +++ b/src/evdev-mt-touchpad.h > @@ -229,4 +229,7 @@ tp_post_button_events(struct tp_dispatch *tp, uint32_t > time); > int > tp_button_handle_state(struct tp_dispatch *tp, uint32_t time); > > +int > +tp_button_touch_active(struct tp_dispatch *tp, struct tp_touch *t); > +
I think the naming here is a bit inconsistent, as a function in the following patch with the same naming convention (tp_touch_active()) is a get:er, not a set:er. IMO functions with side effects should have that detail in their name some how, for example in this case _set_active() or _activate(). Also this type of patch fits better as just a detail of the following patch. That is in order to know how the intended use is without having to jump between patches. Thanks, Jonas > #endif > -- > 1.9.0 > > _______________________________________________ > wayland-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
