The lid dispatch interface is a one-trick pony and can only handle SW_LID. It
ignores other switches but crashes on any event type other than EV_SW and
EV_SYN. Disable those types so we just ignore the event instead of asserting.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101853
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Jason Gerecke <jason.gerecke@wacom.com>
Some devices have worn-out switches or just cheap switches that trigger
multiple button events for each press. These can be identified by unfeasably
short time deltas between the release and the next press event. In the
recordings I've seen so far, that timeout is 8ms.
We have a two-stage behavior: by default, we do not delay any events but we
monitor timestamps. The first time a bouncing button is detected we switch to
debounce mode. From then on, release events are delayed slightly to check for
subsequent button events. If one occurs, the releas and press are filtered. If
none occurs, the release event is passed to the caller.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100057
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If a timer_func causes the removal or addition of a different timer, our tmp
pointer from the list_for_each_safe may not be valid anymore.
This was triggered by having the debounce code trigger a middle button state
change, which caused that timer to be cancelled.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Race conditions may happen where code that cancels a timer is called just
as that timer triggers. If we cancel a timer, we assume that we've put the
code into a state where the timer firing will trigger a bug.
This could be observed with the middle button code if the release event was
held back just long enough. The button release code cancelled the timer, set
the state back to idle and then complained when the timeout handling sent a
'timeout' event while being in idle.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If the kernel sends us a button press for a button that is thought to be down
we have lost track of the state of the button. Ignore the button press event,
in the hope that the next release makes things right again.
A release event may be masked if another process grabs the device for some
period of time, e.g. libinput debug-events --grab.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101796
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Add parsing for a LIBINPUT_ATTR_TRACKPOINT_RANGE property to enable
hardware-dependent ranges. These take precedence over the sensitivity parsing.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This was to counteract hardware that doesn't work well out of the box,
resulting in quite different behavior across devices. Specifically, only
some trackpoints even have the sensitivity setting.
Change to take over all of the pointer acceleration on trackpoints, so we can
control the actual behavior mostly independent of the system setting. So we
drop the CONST_ACCEL parsing (which never was handled as const accel anyway)
and undo the effect that the SENSITIVITY udev property has. [1]
We take a default range at the default sensitivity and multiply it by the
proportion of the current sensitivity. This seems to be accurate enough.
[1] In the future, we should read not only the property but also the sysfs file to
make sure we're handling the right value, but for now this will do.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Switch to a pure factor with a max scaled after a function. The offset is just
0 now (will be removed eventually). Both are determined with a function based
on a linear/exponential regression of a sample set of data pairs.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
There's no guarantee that libinput does the right thing if memory allocation
fails and it's such a niche case on the systems we're targeting that it just
doesn't matter. Simply abort if zalloc ever fails.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
doxygen ends the @bug command when a new section command (@code) is
encountered, leaving us with an "Example code:" on the Bug List page.
Add an empty line to cut off here.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Apple touchpads don't use ABS_MT_PRESSURE but they are multitouch touchpads,
so the current pressure-based handling code doesn't apply because it expects
slot-based pressure for mt touchpads.
Apple does however send useful data for ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR/MINOR, so let's use
that instead. The data provided in those is more-or-less random, so we need a
hwdb entry to track the acceptable thresholds.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If the keyboard is removed while dwt thinks it is in active state, that state
is never reset and subsequent touches are ignored.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101743
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This reduces unexpected cursor moves when placing the thumb near the border
of trackpoint buttons and upper edge of touchpad.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101574
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If the touchpad is suspended and resumed (e.g. lid switch), the initial slot
state may be out of sync. If a touch happened while the touchpad was suspended
and the next touch down is on exactly the same x and/or y coordinate, our
touch point would still have the coordinates of the most recently seen touch
(i.e. before touchpad suspend). This could cause a pointer jump or test case
failures.
The real-world impact of this is minimal, putting the finger down in exactly
the same spot is virtually impossible. It could cause a test case failure in the
lid_disable_touchpad() test though, the second touch sequence was on the same
y coordinate and the touch location for that whole sequence was x/0.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
We used to completely ignore a finger that was within the top software button
area and then moved to the main area and remained there for a timeout. This
avoids erroneous pointer movements when the user moves the finger while using
the trackpoint.
But we also ignored physical clicks, something we should not be doing. This
patch fixes that behavior: we still ignore the finger for movement, but a
physical click now triggers a left click once we've been in the area for the
timeout.
This new behavior doesn't apply within the timeout, i.e. if a finger is in the
right top button area, moves out and immediately clicks, we still trigger a
right click. This avoids erroneous switches to left-clicks when the finger is
at the edge of the button area and moves out during the press.
Related to: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99212
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
If a touch goes past the fixed pressure threshold it is labelled as a palm and
stays a palm. Default value is one that works well here on a T440 and is
virtually impossible to trigger by a normal finger or thumb. A udev property
is exposed so we can handle this in the udev hwdb and the new tool introduce a
few commits ago can help finding the palm detection threshold.
Unlike the other palm detection features, once a palm goes past the threshold
it remains a palm until the touch is released. This means palm overrides any
other palm detection features. For code simplicity, we don't combine the
states but merely check for pressure before and after the other palm detection
functions. If the pressure triggers, it will trigger before anything else. And
if something else is already active (e.g. edge where the pressure doesn't work
well) it will trigger as soon as the palm is released.
The palm threshold should thus be chosen with some room to spare between the
highest finger pressure.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94236
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Most modern touchpads are around 100mm wide, so this provides a ca 8mm edge
zone on each side. The extra 3mm should provide for more reliable palm
detection, a few touches happen to be just on the edge of the 5mm mark.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101433
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Do so on the synaptics serial touchpads at least, they're known to cause
cursor jumps when the third finger is down. Not detecting a tap move means
three-finger taps get more reliable on these touchpads.
This change affects gestures who now effectively have to wait for the tap
timeout to happen. It's a trade-off.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101435https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455443
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Fixes compiler warning:
evdev.c:2899:2: warning: 'pri' may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
On unreliable tablets (Surface3), always force the lid switch to open when the
paired keyboard is removed. This way the lid can't be stuck in a closed state
when there's nothing attached that can actually trigger that state.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101100
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
On unreliable LID switches, we might have the LID declared as closed
while it is actually not. We can not wait for the first switch event to setup
the keyboard listener: it will never occur.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101099
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
What we do not want is libinput to believe the LID is closed while
it's not. But the internal notifier state need to be in sync with the evdev
node, or it's going to be a pain setting the keyboard listener.
But since we don't know if the state is reliable, we track the internal state
separately from the external state so that we can set up the keyboard listener
when the lid is closed, without having libinput actually send lid closed
events for unreliable devices.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101099
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Only pair if the keyboard is either tagged as internal device.
This has another (unlikely) behaviour change: previously we would override the
paired keyboards with ones that look more accurate (e.g. a usb keyboard paired
before a serial would be unpaired and the serial keyboard takes its place).
Now we assume there can only be one internal keyboard, once we have it we
ignore all others. This shouldn't matter in real life provided the tagging is
correct.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
We have heuristics for detecting whether a keyboard is internal or external,
but in some cases (e.g. Surface 3) these heuristics fail. Add a udev property
that we can apply to these cases so we have something that's reliable.
This will likely eventually become ID_INPUT_KEYBOARD_INTEGRATION as shipped by
systemd, similar to the touchpad property.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101101
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
commit 3925936 introduced changes to container_of, this is hopefully the
last part of it.
In the linux kernel, container_of() takes a type name, and not a
variable. Without this, in some cases it is needed to declare an unused
variable in order to call container_of().
example:
return container_of(dispatch, struct fallback_dispatch, base);
instead of:
struct fallback_dispatch *p;
return container_of(dispatch, p, base);
This introduce also list_first_entry(), a simple wrapper around
container_of() to retrieve the first element of a non empty list. It
allows to simplify list_for_each() and list_for_each_safe().
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Laskar <gabriel@lse.epita.fr>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
gcc and clang supports offsetof (defined in stddef.h) as defined by C99
and POSIX.1-2001, use it in container_of.
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Laskar <gabriel@lse.epita.fr>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
This was originally left outside of the button areas in case users tap in
those zones, but we're getting false tap events in that zone.
On a 100mm touchpad, the edge zone is merely 5mm, it's acceptable to ignore
taps in that area even in the software button. We can revisit this if we see
tap detection failures in the future.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415796
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@imgtec.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Because otherwise things go boom, but unless you passed -fshort-enums this
shouldn't happen anyway. And gcc's documentation says don't do that. So don't
do that, or we'll scream at you.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@imgtec.com>
../src/libinput.c:56:17: warning: passing an object that undergoes default
argument promotion to 'va_start' has undefined behavior [-Wvarargs]
The enum's size is compiler-defined, so the enum gets promoted to whatever the
compiler chose. That promotion is undefined, so let's use an int here.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@imgtec.com>
Fixes a bunch of warnings of the kind
../src/evdev.h:378:32: warning: variable 'f' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
return container_of(dispatch, f, base);
Just typecasting NULL means we can ignore sample but for the type.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100976
Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
Reviewed-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Armin Krezović <krezovic.armin@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@imgtec.com>
