For all but the simplest loggers, the current approach of "this is a
continuation of the previous message" doesn't work well. The caller
cannot know whether the *current* message is complete until it receives
the next message - but that message may never come.
Drop this approach, if we need to compile multiple messages into one,
we can handle this internally and then pass it all as one message to the
caller.
Currently only implemented for frame events, the vague plan for the
future is to merely queue the device events internally and "release"
them once a frame event was received, retrofitting the timestamp to the
C event struct (i.e. making ei_event_get_time() available on all device
events).
Meanwhile, the frame event it is.
Creates the socket and adds it; is intended to be used to create client
connections that are passed via a secure channel, e.g. via portals.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
With passive libei contexts receiving events sent by the EIS
implementation, the type of device changes significantly. While a
relative input device could still send data in logical pixels,
absolute devices may not have that luxury.
Best example here is an external tablet (think: Wacom Intuos): that
tablet has no built-in mapping to a screen and thus cannot capture input
events in logical pixels.
Address this by adding a device type, either virtual or physical.
In terms of functionality, the device's type decides:
- only virtual devices have regions
- only physical devices have a size
The event API remains as-is but the event data not represents either
logical pixels (virtual devices) or mm (physical device).
An EIS implementation connected to a passive libei context would likely
create:
- a virtual relative device (sending deltas in logical pixels)
- one or more physical absolute devices (sending deltas in mm)
Previously, a client could only bind to a capability immediately after
SEAT_ADDED and with a rather awkward API to confirm the capabilities.
Change this to allow for dynamic binding of capabilities, i.e. a client
calls ei_bind_capability() or ei_unbind_capability() whenever it feels
like, causing the respective devices of this capabilty to be added or
removed.
This allows for clients that are temporarily disinterested in a
capability but may require said capability later.
The default function takes one capability, a helper for enable/disable
multiple capabilities in one go is provided as well. On the protocol,
only the "bind" request exists which always represents the currently
wanted set of capabilities.
Note that the helper functions for multiple capabilities require NULL
(not zero) as sentinel, thanks to gcc.
A libei context can be initialized as active or passive context -
an "active" context sends events, a "passive" context receives events.
The EIS context supports both simultaneously, it is up to the
implementation to disconnect libei clients that it does not want to
suppport.
For example, the xdotool use-case creates an active libei context. The
EIS implementation controls and sets up the devices, but libei
sends the events.
In an input-capturing use-case, the EIS implementation controls
and sets up the devices **and** sends the events. libei is merely the
receiver for any event, it cannot send events. Thus this use-case
requires a passive libei context.
Most of this code is copy/paste with minor modifications - libei already
had the code to send events, libeis had the code to receive events, so
the vast majority of this patch is copying the code into the respective
other library, swap "ei" and "eis" and then apply the various minor
modifications needed to hook into the existing library.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
There is data that libei and the EIS implementation will want to
exchange that is not covered by the immediate API.
To avoid having to add APIs for all of these, let's provide a generic
property API that both server and client can use to exchange this info.
The property API provides read/write/delete permissions but those only
apply to the client, not the server. The idea is that a server can
create (or restrict) properties that the client can read but not modify
and/or delete. A special-case are properties filled in automatically by
libei: ei.application.pid and ei.application.cmdline. These could be
used by e.g. the portal implementation to match permissions.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This effectively provides the EIS implementation with a notification
that the client will actually send events in the near future. To be used
by e.g. synergy-like clients when the pointer enters the logical screen
so that the EIS implementation can flash a warning or something.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This allows a client to trigger kinetic scrolling (or prevent it).
For compositors implementing EIS, the only realistic scroll source is
continuous which allows for scroll stop events. So let's give the client
the opportunity to trigger those on demand.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Already present in e.g. libinput and wayland, this event allows us to
group several events together to denote them as a logical group.
Required for multi-touch but as we've learned with Wayland it's also
required to group other events (scroll events in the case of Wayland).
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Since the server controls the keymap, and that keymap is likely merged
with some other device let's add the events so we notify the client of
things like numlock-is-down etc.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
There's nothing in the protocol to modify the client device state from
the server, so a pause/resume cycle must leave the client with the
same(-ish) state. Pause is really just that, a short "no event now
please". Anything that would require e.g. modifying the device state by
releasing keys or buttons should result in the device being removed and
re-added.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This keeps most of the current structure but gets rid of client-side
keymaps (which have been broken since the server-side devices anyway).
The new approach: clients get a keymap (or NULL) from the server, if
they don't like it they will have to do transformation on their side.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This is slightly inconsistent with the configure API but more consistent
with the device API (which also has a new() + add()). It reduces
potential bugs though because the region cannot be added to two devices
anymore, and this way we also get a context in the region from the start
(which means we can log).
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This isn't something that libei itself uses but clients like synergy
need to know about this to be able to map relative pointer motion from
one host into the right physical pixel on another host.
This is required for mutter in the x11-compat mode where a 4k screen is
logically twice the size of a 2k screen, despite having the same
physical size.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This is required for supporting synergy/barrier and similar clients.
Replacing the touch and pointer range we now have server-defined
rectangular regions that specify the active zones for this device.
For example, a dual-monitor EIS server would create two touch devices
with one region each for the respective monitors - libei-generated
touches would thus fall on the right area of the monitor. Or just one
device with one region if the second screen should be inaccessible.
A relative device may have multiple regions since it can reach all
screens in the layout.
This leaks the screen layout to libei but that is necessary for the
functionality to work. A libei client may need to control devices
through absolute coordinates and it needs to know where screen
transitions from one to the next screen happen:
+-----------++----------------+
| || |
| B||Q |
| |+----------------+
| |
| A|P
+-----------+
In the above example, position P is unreachable and a client that
controls input on both screens must know that it cannot transition from
A to P but it can transition from B to Q.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This is useful for debugging, let's pass it through and let the log
handler decide whether to use it or not.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This changes the protocol so that it is the EIS implementation that
creates devices within a seat.
A client now "binds" to a seat and the EIS implementation creates
devices matching the requested capabilities. A client can close a device
if it no longer wants those but otherwise everything (including pointer
ranges) is handled by the server.
This is one giant patch because changes at the protocol level cannot
easily be broken out into smaller patches. Some FIXMEs are left which
will be handled in follow-up patches, e.g. the keymap handling is
basically broken right now.
Fixes#7
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
After CONNECT, the EIS implementation needs to add one or more seats. The
libei client can only create devices within those seats. This mirrors the
wayland hierarchy as well as the X.Org one.
The seat has a set of allowed capabilities, so the client knows ahead of time
when it may not be possible to create a specific device.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Build the doxygen API documentation. This is copied from libinput so it takes
over that style (which is more readable than the default doxygen style).
Some extra documentation is added too and all the immediate errors are fixed
in this commit but doxygen still warns about undocumented parameters.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Client-side the approach is a managed touch object rather than passing the
touchid around. This is intentional, it allows for a stackable API in the
future if we need to add things like pressure or major/minor to it.
On the server side the touches are managed through the event object anyway, so
we don't need the same abstraction there.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
The original idea here was that a libei client could request the Pointer
capability to be notified of any pointer movements, thus providing a simple
way to capture input for the synergy use-case.
This is a can of worms better left untouched. How input events are captured
and what information is available is quite specific to the display server, let
alone the triggers for when it needs to start and stop. To have that in libei
requires something like triggers ("start when pointer hits the edge") which
again opens a new can of worms. Which seat are we referring to? What is a
screen edge? How about shortcuts?
Receiving input events can be handled by libeis anyway: any EIS server is
capable of receiving input events by definition so the capability monitoring
could be solved by making the capturing compositor a libei client and the
other process an EIS server. i.e. the circle is closed with:
[compositor|libei] -> [EIS|synergy-client]
||
[synergy-server|libei] -> [EIS|compositor]
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Because events may be in-transit when a client removes the device, we need to
make this a full roundtrip to the server. Otherwise the client may assume a
device is removed, releases all references and then gets the original device
added event for that device. Better to have this as a round-trip instead.
This requires the server to call eis_device_disconnect() on the removed
notifications but we do so during eis_event_unref() anyway in case the server
forgets.
And it changes some of the API behaviors, so adjust the tests for that.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
