IR remote control autorepeat / evdev

[Peter Hutterer]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 03:36:47AM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em 12-05-2011 03:10, Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu:
> > Em 12-05-2011 02:37, Anssi Hannula escreveu:
> 
> >> I don't see any other places:
> >> $ git grep 'REP_PERIOD' .
> >> dvb/dvb-usb/dvb-usb-remote.c:   input_dev->rep[REP_PERIOD] =
> >> d->props.rc.legacy.rc_interval;
> > 
> > Indeed, the REP_PERIOD is not adjusted on other drivers. I agree that we
> > should change it to something like 125ms, for example, as 33ms is too 
> > short, as it takes up to 114ms for a repeat event to arrive.
> > 
> IMO, the enclosed patch should do a better job with repeat events, without
> needing to change rc-core/input/event logic.
> 
> -
> 
> Subject: Use a more consistent value for RC repeat period
> From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab at redhat.com>
> 
> The default REP_PERIOD is 33 ms. This doesn't make sense for IR's,
> as, in general, an IR repeat scancode is provided at every 110/115ms,
> depending on the RC protocol. So, increase its default, to do a
> better job avoiding ghost repeat events.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab at redhat.com>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c b/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> index f53f9c6..ee67169 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> @@ -1044,6 +1044,13 @@ int rc_register_device(struct rc_dev *dev)
>  	 */
>  	dev->input_dev->rep[REP_DELAY] = 500;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * As a repeat event on protocols like RC-5 and NEC take as long as
> +	 * 110/114ms, using 33ms as a repeat period is not the right thing
> +	 * to do.
> +	 */
> +	dev->input_dev->rep[REP_PERIOD] = 125;
> +
>  	path = kobject_get_path(&dev->dev.kobj, GFP_KERNEL);
>  	printk(KERN_INFO "%s: %s as %s\n",
>  		dev_name(&dev->dev),

so if I get this right, a XkbSetControls(.. XkbRepeatKeysMask ...) by a
client to set the repeat rate would provide the same solution - for those
clients/devices affected. 

The interesting question is how clients would identify the devices that are
affected by this (other than trial and error).

Cheers,
  Peter