On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 02:59:07PM +0200, Andreas Pokorny wrote:
> The mx4 touchscreen driver emits BTN_TOUCH and BTN_TOOL_FINGER key events
> on a new contact. Prior to this patch only the BTN_TOUCH event was filtered
> out. Now the whole range of BTN_ events for tool types and certain builtin
> multi finger gestures are marked as non-key type.
>
> This patch is based on v5 of the touch property extenion patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Pokorny <[email protected]>
> ---
> src/evdev.c | 10 ++---
> test/touch.c | 125
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/evdev.c b/src/evdev.c
> index 04df275..3e22aa9 100644
> --- a/src/evdev.c
> +++ b/src/evdev.c
> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ evdev_flush_pending_event(struct evdev_device *device,
> uint64_t time)
> static enum evdev_key_type
> get_key_type(uint16_t code)
> {
> - if (code == BTN_TOUCH)
> + if (code >= BTN_DIGI && code <= BTN_TOOL_QUADTAP)
> return EVDEV_KEY_TYPE_NONE;
>
> if (code >= KEY_ESC && code <= KEY_MICMUTE)
> @@ -630,16 +630,16 @@ evdev_process_key(struct evdev_device *device,
> if (e->value == 2)
> return;
>
> - if (e->code == BTN_TOUCH) {
> - if (!device->is_mt)
> + type = get_key_type(e->code);
> +
> + if (type == EVDEV_KEY_TYPE_NONE) {
> + if (e->code == BTN_TOUCH && !device->is_mt)
> evdev_process_touch_button(device, time, e->value);
> return;
> }
>
> evdev_flush_pending_event(device, time);
>
> - type = get_key_type(e->code);
> -
> /* Ignore key release events from the kernel for keys that libinput
> * never got a pressed event for. */
> if (e->value == 0) {
this part looks good
> diff --git a/test/touch.c b/test/touch.c
> index 875d94d..05d1ff3 100644
> --- a/test/touch.c
> +++ b/test/touch.c
> @@ -912,6 +912,129 @@ START_TEST(touch_point_no_minor_or_orientation)
> }
> END_TEST
>
> +START_TEST(touchscreen_with_btn_tool_finger_on_down)
> +{
> + struct libevdev_uinput *uinput;
> + struct libinput *li;
> + struct libinput_device *device;
> + struct libinput_event *event;
> + struct libinput_event_touch *tevent;
quick grep shows all the other test use 'tev', let's keep it consistent.
> + const struct input_absinfo abs[] = {
> + { ABS_X, 0, 1152, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_Y, 0, 1920, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_SLOT, 0, 9, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID, 0, 65535, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_POSITION_X, 0, 1152, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, 0, 1920, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR, 0, 23, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { ABS_MT_TOUCH_MINOR, 0, 23, 0, 0, 0 },
> + { -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1 }
> + };
> + const struct input_event input_sequence[] = {
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_SLOT, 0},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID, 9},
> + { {0}, EV_KEY, BTN_TOUCH, 1},
> + { {0}, EV_KEY, BTN_TOOL_FINGER, 1},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_POSITION_X, 128},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, 240},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR, 5},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MINOR, 4},
> + { {0}, EV_SYN, SYN_REPORT, 0},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR, 6},
> + { {0}, EV_SYN, SYN_REPORT, 0},
> + { {0}, EV_ABS, ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID, -1},
> + { {0}, EV_KEY, BTN_TOUCH, 0},
> + { {0}, EV_KEY, BTN_TOOL_FINGER, 0},
> + { {0}, EV_SYN, SYN_REPORT, 0}
> + };
I'm wondering - wouldn't it be worth to add this device as a separate litest
device and add the BTN_TOOL_FINGER in the down events for that device?
hand-crafted devices and event sequences should be for custom devices and
quirky sequences, this one appears to be pretty stock-standard and thus we
expect everything else to work fine as well.
plus, I suspect if you add this as a normal test device, the other tests
will fail so you may not even need a separate test.
> + const int num_events = sizeof input_sequence / sizeof input_sequence[0];
ARRAY_LENGTH
> + const int width = 1152;
> + const int height = 1920;
> +
> + uinput = litest_create_uinput_abs_device(
> + "test device",
> + NULL, abs,
> + EV_KEY, BTN_TOUCH,
> + EV_KEY, BTN_TOOL_FINGER,
> + INPUT_PROP_MAX, INPUT_PROP_DIRECT,
> + -1, -1);
> +
> + li = litest_create_context();
> + device = libinput_path_add_device(li,
> + libevdev_uinput_get_devnode(uinput));
> + ck_assert(device != NULL);
> + device = libinput_device_ref(device);
> +
> + for (int i = 0; i!=num_events; ++i)
> + libevdev_uinput_write_event(uinput,
> + input_sequence[i].type,
> + input_sequence[i].code,
> + input_sequence[i].value);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(libinput_event_get_type(event),
> LIBINPUT_EVENT_DEVICE_ADDED);
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
drop this group, use a litest_drain_events() instead after the add device
and before you start sending touch events.
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_DOWN);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(
> + round(libinput_event_touch_get_x_transformed(tevent, width)),
> + 128);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(
> + round(libinput_event_touch_get_y_transformed(tevent, height)),
> + 240);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(
> + round(libinput_event_touch_get_major_transformed(tevent,
> + width,
> + height)),
> + 5);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(
> + round(libinput_event_touch_get_minor_transformed(tevent,
> + width,
> + height)),
> + 4);
this is pretty unreadable, a tmp variable "value" would make this a lot
better.
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_FRAME);
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_MOTION);
> + ck_assert_int_eq(
> + round(libinput_event_touch_get_major_transformed(tevent,
> + width,
> + height)),
> + 6);
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_FRAME);
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_UP);
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + litest_wait_for_event(li);
> + event = libinput_get_event(li);
> + tevent = litest_is_touch_event(event, LIBINPUT_EVENT_TOUCH_FRAME);
you only need litest_wait_for_event() once after libinput_dispatch() or if
you're expecting a timer to expire. both isn't true here, so simply skip
them.
> + libinput_event_destroy(event);
> +
> + ck_assert_int_eq(libinput_next_event_type(li), LIBINPUT_EVENT_NONE);
litest_assert_empty_queue()
> +
> + libinput_device_unref(device);
> + libinput_unref(li);
> + libevdev_uinput_destroy(uinput);
> +}
> +END_TEST
> +
> void
> litest_setup_tests(void)
> {
> @@ -942,4 +1065,6 @@ litest_setup_tests(void)
> litest_add_ranged("touch:state", touch_initial_state, LITEST_TOUCH,
> LITEST_PROTOCOL_A, &axes);
>
> litest_add("touch:time", touch_time_usec, LITEST_TOUCH,
> LITEST_TOUCHPAD);
> +
> + litest_add_no_device("touch:filter EV_KEY BTN_TOOL_FINGER",
> touchscreen_with_btn_tool_finger_on_down);
the string in the test is a suite name (comes from the check framework) and
serves to limit tests to a category of tests. e.g. you can run the
"touch:calibration" suite to check all calibration tests.
it's not to label a specific test, that's what the function name is for.
Please come up with something more generic, "touch:special events" or so
maybe.
Cheers,
Peter
> }
> --
> 2.5.0
>
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
