From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 6 23:20:03 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2AA01065674 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 23:20:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFAB58FC16 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 23:20:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n16NK30s087552 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 23:20:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n16NK30P087551; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 23:20:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 23:20:03 GMT Message-Id: <200902062320.n16NK30P087551@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org From: Jung-uk Kim Cc: Subject: Re: ports/131124: x11/xorg - New xorg 7.4 hangs until mouse is moved when AllowEmptyInput turned off X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Jung-uk Kim List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 23:20:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/131124; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jung-uk Kim To: Joe Marcus Clarke Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org, Serge Shilov , Peter Zehm , rnoland@freebsd.org, freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/131124: x11/xorg - New xorg 7.4 hangs until mouse =?iso-8859-1?q?is=09moved_when_AllowEmptyInput_turned?= off Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 18:12:27 -0500 On Friday 06 February 2009 05:37 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Friday 06 February 2009 04:27 pm, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > What about modifying the sysmouse driver to more gracefully > > handle multiple open attempts (e.g. fail on subsequent attempts). > > What effect would that have on X? > > I thought about that. In fact, I implemented something along the > line but threw it away because 1) I was not sure of its expected > behavior, 2) it is intertwined with syscons and I was afraid of > breaking it, 3) it just hides Xserver problem (i.e., mixed uses of > static/auto configurations) from an OS driver, 4) it does not > provide fix for release users, 5) possible POLA violations, etc. If my memory serves, there is another important reason: 6) Xserver and mouse driver open/close same device multiple times (at least twice), one for SetupAuto and one for enabling the device, I think. Depending on timing, the previous device may not be what HAL is expecting. Jung-uk Kim