1. 12 Jun, 2017 2 commits
  2. 09 Jun, 2017 2 commits
  3. 08 Jun, 2017 1 commit
  4. 07 Jun, 2017 1 commit
  5. 06 Jun, 2017 6 commits
  6. 02 Jun, 2017 19 commits
  7. 31 May, 2017 4 commits
    • Peter Hutterer's avatar
      e0ac0153
    • Peter Hutterer's avatar
      test: tighten some test cases · 3108653e
      Peter Hutterer authored
      Instead of just waiting for events, use a libinput_dispatch() and assume the
      event is there when we want it.
      Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer's avatarPeter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
      3108653e
    • Peter Hutterer's avatar
    • Peter Hutterer's avatar
      test: make sure we search for event node, not the parent input device · 89ac7fd2
      Peter Hutterer authored
      This explains the heisenbugs when running the test suite. libevdev gives us
      the syspath to the /sys/.../input123 node, not the one for the event node.
      The device node path is created based on the sysfs tree, so there's a
      window where the device node may not exist yet but we already returned the
      device node path.
      
      In litest, we're using a udev monitor to wait until the device is ready for
      us, but the path interface only takes a device node path. So what happens is:
      * libevdev gives us a syspath for the input node and a device path
      * the monitor receives the input node udev device and matches the syspath
      * we pass that up to the caller litest_add_device_with_overrides()
        which opens the device node and adds it to libinput
      * the path interface creates a udev device from the device node, which still
        points to the old device node. Things fail because we don't have the device
        we expect or it doesn't send events and eventually times out [1].
      
      The errors triggered by this are either odd udev property mismatches or
      timeouts because events are never processed.
      
      This race is fixed by simply constructing the actual device node path we
      expect from the udev device and waiting for the right device.
      
      [1] We rely on the caller to notify us when to remove the device and thus
      silently ignore ENODEV.
      Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer's avatarPeter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>
      89ac7fd2
  8. 29 May, 2017 1 commit
  9. 26 May, 2017 2 commits
  10. 23 May, 2017 2 commits