The kernel may send a 'release' event without ever having sent a key
'pressed' event in case the key was pressed before libinput was
initiated. Ignore these events so that we always guarantee a release
event always comes after a pressed event for any given key or button.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
When overriding events of a test device, if one would enable an event
that was already enabled by default for the overridden device, an assert
checking if the event was already enabled would fail and cause the test
to fail.
Since the merging of the default and overriding event lists is implemented
by simply concatinating them letting libevdev deal with ignoring
superfluous event enabling, remove the assert to allow the implementation
to work.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Some tests in test/path.c and test/udev.c are not dependent on
device behaviour but rather managing of device lifetime etc. Run those
tests only once with only one device, resulting more or less the same
code coverage but shorter run time.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Because the axes that tool reports can change depending on the tool in use, we
want to be able to provide functionality to determine which axes each tool can
support.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
With tablets that don't support serial numbers, we can't guarantee that the tool
objects are unique. Because of this, this can give clients the false impression
that a tool without a serial number is being shared between tablets when it very
well might not be. So we keep tools without serial numbers in a list that's
local to the tablet they belong to, and keep tools with serials in a list that's
global within the libinput context.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Provides the bounding box only, with slot 0 always being the upper/left, slot
1 being the lower-right touch. This needs to use the touch_down etc. litest
interfaces, which are now widened to double (leftover from 489630f58) and a
device-specific private pointer in the litest device.
New device feature for litest: LITEST_SEMI_MT
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Set BTN_TOUCH, BTN_TOOL_DOUBLETAP automatically depending on the number of
fingers down.
This emulates real event sequences a bit better than the current approach,
though it's not a 100% correct emulation:
1) On real devices, BTN_* are usually sent last before the SYN_REPORT - here
they are sent first to slot in with the custom, device-specific event
sequence. We should only ever look at the complete sequence anyway, so this
shouldn't matter.
2) On real devices, the switch from BTN_TOOL_DOUBLETAP to TRIPLETAP and vice
versa is not always toggled within the same SYN_REPORT
3) On synaptics devices, BTN_TOUCH is released in the frame where
BTN_TOOL_DOUBLETAP is set. It is then immediately set again in the next
frame. With the current litest framework this is hard to integrate, so we
just leave BTN_TOUCH set the whole time, which is what MT devices do if
they don't have BTN_TOOL_DOUBLETAP.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Some tests doesn't use or doesn't need to use the test device
automatically created when adding a test case for certain types of
devices. For these tests, to shorten test run time, don't create the
test devices that would be ignored.
Signed-off-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
More expressive in the caller and less ambiguous about return values (is it 1?
is it non-zero? can it be negative?)
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
They don't set resolution so we can't calculate the size but we know they're
big enough to need palm detection.
And fix the descriptor for the bcm5974. For some reason this was advertising
synaptics coordinates. Fix it to represent (one of) the apple touchpads.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
On small touchpads, a touch that intends to go across the width of the
touchpad is likely to start in the edge zone. Likewise, on those touchpads the
chances of a palm event happening on the edge is small.
A minimum width of 8cm determined by an elaborate process of completely
unscientific guesswork: the x220 is roughly 7.5cm across and doesn't suffer
much from edge events, the T440s is 10cm across and definitely suffers from
it. So the trigger width likely somewhere in between which makes 8cm about as
valid as any other guess.
Note that this disables palm detection for resolution-less touchpads too - if
we don't know how big the touchpad is we can't know if palm detection on the
edges is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Any legitimate finger movement that starts in the palm area is expected to
move out of the palm area at an angle roughly orthogonal to the edge of the
touchpad. Check for the direction of the movement vector, and if it is within
the accepted cardinal/ordinal directions then proceed.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
On small touchpads a touch that is intended to traverse much of the screen
width may start at the very edge, i.e. in the palm zone.
In that case, and if the touch moves out of the palm zone quickly enough, drop
the palm label and make it a normal touchpoint.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
A large part of palm events are situated on the far edges of the touchpad. In
a test run on a T440s while typing a long email all but 2 touch points were
located in the outer ~5% of the touchpad. Define a 5% exclusion zone on the
left and right edges in which new touchpoint is automatically assigned to be a
palm.
A finger may move into that exclusion zone without being marked as palm, it
just can't start in one.
On clickpads, the exclusion zone does not extend into the software buttons.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Until uinput gets that capability (likely not before 3.17) all we can do is a
racy approach of setting it after creating it. That won't work well for
anything test where libinput is already listening to udev when the device is
created, but it does work for those cases where libinput is started after the
device was initialized.
And it's a better alternative than not testing anything dependent on
resolution settings.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
This breaks when we have a device resolution set on the test devices,
specificially on the T440. The current tests use a delta of 1% of the device
which with the resolution set results in an effective delta of 3 - above the
scroll threshold.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Using a 0-100% range is useful but in some cases we need events with finer
than 1% granularity.
And fix up the two-finger test that now fails. This was a bug in the test
anyway, the dx/dy supplied here was 1% of the touchpad width. Confined to
integers this meant we only ever had the touch down, then the single move by
1%. That caused two events - not enough to satisfy tp_estimate_delta, so we
always had a delta of 0/0 regardless of the size of the move.
Now with doubles this fails, so drop it to 0.1% instead, which is small enough
on all touchpads we currently have.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Since the orientation of the tablet can potentially change, this naming scheme
makes a lot more sense then VERTICAL and HORIZONTAL does since they don't
reflect the actual physical movement.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
We send two delta events. One may get eaten or softened by the accel code but
our expectation should be that both may get through, so the length of the
expected vector is √((2dx)² + (2dy)²). That is the maximum length we expect
though for deltas ranged [-1, 1].
Deltas above the threshold would fail this test but we can fix that when
needed.
Pointer acceleration is subject to timing changes. When running tests in
valgrind pointer accel timeouts and tracker resets may happen so we can't
guarantee a specific acceleration length.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Now that we have run-time changes of the tap.enabled state move the check
to the IDLE state only. Otherwise the tap machine may hang if tapping is
disabled while a gesture is in progress.
Two basic tests are added to check for the tap default setting - which is now
"tap disabled by default", for two reasons:
* if you don't know that tapping is a thing (or enabled by default), you get
spurious button events that make the desktop feel buggy.
* if you do know what tapping is and you want it, you usually know where to
enable it, or at least you can search for it.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Those three are the ones that matter for logging or device identification in
callers, so let's provide them.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonas Ådahl <jadahl@gmail.com>
The current code triggers multi-finger tapping even if the finger released was
previously held on the touchpad for a while. For an event sequence of:
1. first finger down
2. first finger move past threshold/wait past timeout
3. second finger down
4. first finger up
The second finger initiates the two-finger tap state, but the button event is
sent when the first finger releases - despite that finger not meeting the
usual tap constraints. This sequence can happen whenever a user swaps fingers.
Add the finger state to the actual touchpoints and update them whenever the
constrains are broken. Then, discard button events if the respective touch
did not meet the conditions.
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/76760
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
The tablet state updates with each event during libinput_dispatch(), but the
state in the event must reflect the state at the time of the event.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
A proximity-in event is something we want, especially since the current drafted
wayland spec has a proximity-in event. Adding this also makes our events more
consistent. And since we can just report the current tool in use with
proximity-in events, we can get rid of the tool-update event.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Because bad distance events still trigger calls to tablet_flush(),
tablet_flush() will see that the tablet is out of proximity and assume it's an
appropriate time to send a proximity-out event, even when we've already sent
one. This results in multiple proximity-out events being sent in a row instead
of just one.
In addition, the bad distance events test has been modified to pick up on this.
We shouldn't be receiving /any/ events when we get false distance events from
evdev anyway.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Chandler Paul <thatslyude@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
And add an example xorg.conf.d .conf file for ignoring these devices under
xorg.
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If the user puts down to fingers to scroll, then changes his mind and
lifts them, without having them moved past the initial scroll threshold in
either direction, then any movement which he has done will cause a spurious
scroll event when the second finger down is lifted first.
The problem is that t->is_pointer was not being set to false in this case,
since that is done in tp_post_twofinger_scroll after checking scroll.state
which never gets set in this scenario.
Instead of changing the order, simply completely remove scroll.state completely
it is a boolean, and everywhere we check for it we also check for the axis bits
in state.direction, so it is not necessary.
Also add a check to ensure there are no spurious motion events.
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Inverted order of release from the other test
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
For those whose eyes struggle to focus on 5 zeros in a row, or those just sick
of forgetting one zero and wondering why things don't work.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
