On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:00:13PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Sat, 21 May 2016 03:43:04 +0100 > Emmanuel Gil Peyrot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This client uses libiio to retrieve accelerometer values from the iio > > subsystem on Linux (and maybe some other kernels), and automatically > > rotate the output whenever orientation changed. > > > > I tested it with a mma8453 accelerometer, but everything needed should > > be available in the configuration to make it work with any other iio > > device. > > > > Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Gil Peyrot <[email protected]> > > --- > > Makefile.am | 24 +++ > > clients/autorotater.c | 472 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > configure.ac | 15 ++ > > desktop-shell/shell.c | 1 + > > protocol/weston-rotater.xml | 26 +++ > > src/compositor.h | 3 + > > src/rotater.c | 150 ++++++++++++++ > > 7 files changed, 691 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 clients/autorotater.c > > create mode 100644 protocol/weston-rotater.xml > > create mode 100644 src/rotater.c > > Hi Emmanuel,
Hi Pekka, > > why is there a new client for this? Could it not be a plugin? > > Is IIO potentially so slow and blocking we cannot use it in the server > process? > > Why the polling approach, cannot IIO deliver events? The actual issue here is driver support for event-based IIO is spotty at best, as I found out while trying to implement that method. I haven’t been able to find out programatically whether a driver will behave as expected in the event-based API (which IIO people call “the high-speed mode”), and implementing both methods with a blacklist doesn’t seem sensible. Having a method working with every driver seems to be the most sensible and generic way. > > Should there be a way to set which outputs get rotated by a specific > IIO device, rather than assuming there is just one device rotating all > outputs at once? This has been added to the v2, an arbitrary number of autorotators can now be used to drive an arbitrary number of weston_outputs. > > Any reason why this is limited to desktop-shell rather than being a > shell-agnostic feature? In the v2 I made it a Weston module, it now won’t be used without being listed in the modules option of the [core] section. > > > Thanks, > pq > [snip] Thanks for the review, -- Emmanuel Gil Peyrot Collabora Ltd. _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
