From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752789Ab0BSMGF (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:06:05 -0500 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:43130 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751018Ab0BSMGB (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:06:01 -0500 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:07:30 +0000 From: Alan Cox To: "Ari G. Entlich" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a new VT mode which is like VT_PROCESS but doesn't require a VT_RELDISP ioctl call Message-ID: <20100219120730.4793ce0d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <28568671.141471266580824918.JavaMail.root@zimbra> References: <7662526.141431266580674036.JavaMail.root@zimbra> <28568671.141471266580824918.JavaMail.root@zimbra> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.4 (GTK+ 2.18.6; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > 1. VT_AUTO doesn't send signals to anything when a VT switch happens, precisely > because VT_AUTO is supposed to be used in the case where there's nothing to > send signals TO (i.e. the VT is managed by the kernel). The X server still > needs to know about VT switches to turn input devices off and such. Ok.. > VT_ACKACQ, it wouldn't really make sense for there to be a new VT_ACKACQ value, > because VT_ACKACQ is something which gets passed to a VT_RELDISP, and VT_RELDISP > isn't needed at all in this new mode. I don't want to change the existing values as they are somewhat visible to user space. > I hope that clarifies things. Yes. You could use the VT_EVENT facility for the switch monitoring but the asynchronous nature of the reporting probably isn't what is needed for input device switching etc. Looks fine to me - just bump the value and resubmit