<div dir="auto">Do you happen to know of a good readymade program that fakes the presence of a touch input device with uinput? I'd love to test this series, but current Weston is far ahead of what my embedded devices will do; so I'm in the position of mostly relying on the desktop for testing. </div> <div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Mar 23, 2018, 09:38 Matt Hoosier <<a href="mailto:matt.hoosier@gmail.com">matt.hoosier@gmail.com</a>> wrote: </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Pekka Paalanen <<a href="mailto:ppaalanen@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ppaalanen@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 08:46:46 -0500 > Matt Hoosier <<a href="mailto:matt.hoosier@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">matt.hoosier@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > >> I am very much in favor of the overall approach on this patch series. >> I've experienced every single one of the problems described in this >> summary, and my company currently resorts to maintaining a hacky >> out-of-tree calibration tool to paper over these problems. > > Hi Matt, > > that is very heartwarming to hear. Is your tool specifically for Weston > too? Yes and no. It's not phrased as a patch against the Weston source code, but it uses heuristics for determining which output the raw /dev/input/* events should be correlated against, and those heuristics probably would fail if some different compositor happened to be running. > > I would be very happy if this proposal fits your needs, and certainly > interested in hearing where it falls short. > > > Thanks, > pq > >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 7:00 AM, Pekka Paalanen <<a href="mailto:ppaalanen@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ppaalanen@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> > From: Pekka Paalanen <<a href="mailto:pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk</a>> >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > the existing touchscreen calibrator in Weston has several problems. This >> > proposal intends to solve them all by introducing a new protocol >> > extension for touchscreen calibration and a new calibrator tool. >> > >> > The benefits of the new tool, which the old tool lacks, are: >> > >> > - You can unambiguously pick a physical touch device to calibrate. >> > >> > - You can be sure your touch events come only from that particular >> > device, and that you cannot miss touch events even if the current >> > calibration is horribly wrong. >> > >> > - You can be sure the calibration window (pattern) is shown on the right >> > output with the right coordinates. >> > >> > - You can unambiguously calibrate even multiple touchscreens that are >> > all cloned (showing the same image). >> > >> > - You get a libinput style calibation matrix instead of the >> > WL_CALIBRATION format which depends on output resolution. >> > >> > - You can load a new calibration into the compositor without playing >> > tricks with udev or restarting the compositor. >> > >> > There is more discussion about the topic at: >> > <a href="https://phabricator.freedesktop.org/T7868" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://phabricator.freedesktop.org/T7868</a> >> > >> > This patch series depends on the clone mode series: >> > <a href="https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/32898/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/32898/</a> >> > >> > There is a full branch available at: >> > <a href="https://gitlab.collabora.com/pq/weston/commits/touchcalib-1" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gitlab.collabora.com/pq/weston/commits/touchcalib-1</a> > </blockquote></div>