[PATCH 06/42] tests: update for touch support
Peter Hutterer
peter.hutterer at who-t.net
Fri Dec 16 03:12:05 PST 2011
On 16/12/11 20:56 , walter harms wrote:
>
>
> Am 15.12.2011 04:01, schrieb Peter Hutterer:
>> Touch event mask must be set for all three event types.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer<peter.hutterer at who-t.net>
>> ---
>> test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c | 2 +-
>> test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c b/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>> index 89ffc3d..b405556 100644
>> --- a/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>> +++ b/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static void test_XIPassiveGrabDevice(void)
>> request->deviceid = XIAllMasterDevices;
>>
>> printf("Testing invalid grab types\n");
>> - for (i = XIGrabtypeFocusIn + 1; i< 0xFF; i++)
>> + for (i = XIGrabtypeTouchBegin + 1; i< 0xFF; i++)
>> {
>> request->grab_type = i;
>> request_XIPassiveGrabDevice(&client_request, request, BadValue, request->grab_type);
>> diff --git a/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c b/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>> index 4eaf839..0390858 100644
>> --- a/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>> +++ b/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>> @@ -125,6 +125,28 @@ static void request_XISelectEvent(xXISelectEventsReq *req, int error)
>> assert(rc == error);
>> }
>>
>> +static void _set_bit(unsigned char *bits, int bit)
>> +{
>> + SetBit(bits, bit);
>> + if (bit>= XI_TouchBegin&& bit<= XI_TouchOwnership)
>> + {
>> + SetBit(bits, XI_TouchBegin);
>> + SetBit(bits, XI_TouchUpdate);
>> + SetBit(bits, XI_TouchEnd);
>> + }
>> +}
>
> So far i understand you want to avoid setting already set bits.
> Would it hurt to set them again ?
if any of the four XI_Touch* is set, begin/update/end must be set.
setting them twice doesn't hurt, especially not in a test. And we have a
test in input.c that makes sure that SetBit on masks works as expected,
iirc.
>> +static void _clear_bit(unsigned char *bits, int bit)
>> +{
>> + ClearBit(bits, bit);
>> + if (bit>= XI_TouchBegin&& bit<= XI_TouchOwnership)
>> + {
>> + ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchBegin);
>> + ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchUpdate);
>> + ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchEnd);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>
> The naming is unfortunate.
huh?
>> static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>> {
>> int i, j;
>> @@ -157,9 +179,9 @@ static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>> memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>> for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>> {
>> - SetBit(bits, j);
>> + _set_bit(bits, j);
>> request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>> - ClearBit(bits, j);
>> + _clear_bit(bits, j);
>> }
>>
>> /* Test 2:
>> @@ -173,7 +195,7 @@ static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>
>> for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>> {
>> - SetBit(bits, j);
>> + _set_bit(bits, j);
>> request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -187,9 +209,9 @@ static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>
>> for (j = XI2LASTEVENT + 1; j< mask->mask_len * 4; j++)
>> {
>> - SetBit(bits, j);
>> + _set_bit(bits, j);
>> request_XISelectEvent(req, BadValue);
>> - ClearBit(bits, j);
>> + _clear_bit(bits, j);
>> }
>>
>> /* Test 4:
>> @@ -200,7 +222,7 @@ static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>> memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>> for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>> {
>> - SetBit(bits, j);
>> + _set_bit(bits, j);
>> request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -227,8 +249,8 @@ static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>> mask->mask_len = (nmasks + 3)/4;
>> memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>> for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>> - SetBit(bits, j);
>> - ClearBit(bits, XI_HierarchyChanged);
>> + _set_bit(bits, j);
>> + _clear_bit(bits, XI_HierarchyChanged);
>> for (j = 1; j< 6; j++)
>> {
>> mask->deviceid = j;
More information about the xorg-devel
mailing list