<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTOURBUG - xf86-input-libinput: Rough and lopsided mouse movement in games/apps that reposition mouse" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96982#c12">Comment # 12</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTOURBUG - xf86-input-libinput: Rough and lopsided mouse movement in games/apps that reposition mouse" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96982">bug 96982</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:peter.hutterer@who-t.net" title="Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>"> Peter Hutterer</a> <pre>my thought about in-pixel warping would've caused a warp to 100 to behave differently dependent on the distance: * from 100.3 it would warp to 100.3 * from 100.9 it would warp to 100.9 * from 101.1 it would warp to 100.0 * from 110.9 it would warp to 100.0 because once you get outside of the single pixel range, you need to reset subpixel information. This wouldn't be a problem for large warps because relying on subpixel there doesn't matter anyway. but it would be problematic for exactly your use-case where we sometimes hit a pixel, sometimes not. it would require some magic threshold of "keep the subpixel if warping less than 10 pixels" or something like that but that sounds a bit too magic. a 0.5 base position is an interesting idea though it will need special casing for screen edges because a half-pixel would trigger a move to the next screen. I don't think there should be any ill effects for anything else. it would be something worth trying if you have the time.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>