-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature: pointer movement/scrolling #2027
Feature: pointer movement/scrolling #2027
Conversation
8b2dc31
to
bd9210d
Compare
app/src/mouse/key_listener.c
Outdated
k_work_submit_to_queue(zmk_mouse_work_q(), &mouse_tick); | ||
} | ||
|
||
K_TIMER_DEFINE(mouse_timer, mouse_timer_cb, mouse_clear_cb); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The part that initially made me bang my head against the wall with all this is the fact that Zephyr sometimes seems to de-prioritize these timers if the system is under load.
This is (as far as I was able to understand) the primary cause of the instability with mouse movement - reports can be sent out at random intervals or dropped entirely.
I was exploring re-writing this system to use a dedicated thread, but I wasn't skilled enough at C at the time.
I'm not sure this basis for the tick system is robust enough for general use.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So... timers should be using the hardware timers to trigger, and happen in ISR context. The queue has a certain priority, can be preempted, etc. Tweaking that thread priority might help, but I'll play a bit to see what I can determine. Thanks for the insight!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is most certainly not definitive - it's a half-remembered conclusion from an investigation I wasn't skilled enough to perform two years ago, just food for thought. I distinctly remember reports being delayed or dropped and that causing instability. hog.c:335
might also be worth taking a look at.
bd9210d
to
eab4709
Compare
|
||
/* Mouse move behavior */ | ||
#define MOVE_Y(vert) ((vert)&0xFFFF) | ||
#define MOVE_Y_DECODE(encoded) (int16_t)((encoded)&0x0000FFFF) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it might make sense to move these decode defines outside the dt-bindings header, and to either plain mouse.h or the corresponding event headers they are used in.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMHO, they are complementary and should live together.... I think keeping them here is appropriate.
32ed133
to
c2bf21b
Compare
c2bf21b
to
07c181d
Compare
Could you please change the target to https://github.com/petejohanson/zmk/tree/core/zephyr-3.5-update here? The review is unnecessarily cluttered. |
Unfortunately, that will move the PR into a different GH fork, and make a bit of a mess. I recommend reviewing each commit for clarity for now, until the Zephyr 3.5 bits are merged into ZMK |
505343b
to
d837c95
Compare
d837c95
to
a95b68b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think these are some missed updates for the rebase to account for 36eda571b
This isn't abandoned, I am guessing Studio work is getting more priority right now. Pete mentioned on Discord that he is planning to refactor the endpoints a bit (the current split one has some issues on some OS, like Ubuntu 22.04). Meanwhile if anyone needs a rebased branch in the very near future, you can cherry-pick from https://github.com/caksoylar/zmk/commits/caksoylar/experimental. |
Co-authored-by: Alexander Krikun <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Robert U <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Shawn Meier <[email protected]>
* Add ability to swap X/Y, invert X and Y values, and apply a scalar multiplier/divisor.
* Remove now-unused mouse work queue and related mouse main file. * Move ticks config into a DTS property on the two axis input behavior.
* Corrected logging for two-axis input timestamps.
* Buffer data from input devices and only surface to HID once synd'd.
* Always import mouse keys behavior and their associated listeners. * Tweak listener code to only add listener nodes when listener and the associated input device are enabled.
dbbeb70
to
bc75de5
Compare
I built a new firmware for my keyboard after the recent changes had been pushed and I noticed a very strange behavior with certain keys. I have the following settings for mouse behaviors:
In both nodes the delay-ms is set to 0. But I clearly have a delay with (and only with) &msc SCRL_DOWN and &mmv MOVE_LEFT now. Sorry. Just tested it on another keyboard and the issue is most likely caused by #2042 Yep. I can confirm it now. Once I add at least one Antecedent Morph behavior to the keymap I end up with a very small delay for &msc SCRL_DOWN and &mmv MOVE_LEFT. After some more digging I discovered that the key positions of &msc SCRL_DOWN and &mmv MOVE_LEFT in my keymap are shared with these combos:
And it appears that the combos are the (possibly main) contributors of these lags. But the funny thing is that the lag was non-existent even with combos until antecedent_morph_keycode_state_changed_listener started to run. So, it looks like both combos and Antecedent Morph listener contribute to these lags. Excluding Mouse layer from global combos, like:
completely fixes this lag. So, I guess global combos shouldn't overlap with Mouse behaviors. |
|
||
### Examples | ||
|
||
The following will send a scroll down event to the host when pressed/held: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you mean mouse movement down
event?
Closing since #2477 is merged. |
@caksoylar does it mean that I can use the main zmk for pointing instead of this PR? |
I have been using main since, it is working. |
Correct. See the documentation on zmk.dev for the details. |
Continuation of the incremental integration of the great work from @krikun98 in #778 with the movement and scrolling pieces next. Based on the rebased work from @caksoylar and and the split acceleration from @bryanforbes
TODO