From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Sep 16 07:59:09 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52E5C3DBDE9; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:59:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from mail-il1-x12e.google.com (mail-il1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Brsth3pZ7z4Pdb; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:59:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: by mail-il1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id t12so5605299ilh.3; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:59:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=x/ckyUUPnE6/Haobd9gyxqNfnALeadXm0fubIOsA/80=; b=erHMiUDaNs9V7+M2tHaKcVfByGHlkEnMkbQfu4OkZrjrYtWxZAh08T9iAxRjD7zLfa mcTHiCsy3URf/3iQRP2WzSfo5dTD2CORmfOj8dPRZI3bZzWr/WPsTV6DQ/oOxzmCUsO0 pZ4KAB52nlaRFlTj2idrE60+dfuD852aJsgnH4VLkoZyw+UfpmlYcxmiAMNTZIoKtfQP CZAfTMfSV+9ODqlxBxPN8H1r08sqna9Elv9CSbHSmyzejZqrbsWRj503rXbiKi+huBnl UsC8iftno2ewhcNtFc/pkZSyMI1U2LvmSkPFEheuQjdeVU7dVu0OdudUhVixLyxYZNFC 62Yg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=x/ckyUUPnE6/Haobd9gyxqNfnALeadXm0fubIOsA/80=; b=k9vAWWh+43bhELp8D4YkfuL8skWWYmEv+Dxj/PIxo34fbRSMXCmJVWtTNwLebDNoHf POF6G+eGCUjeOWSBAQBBQCawE9xQ9URkSUKLoP7UbqMqomIi6lWbKFYC2gd9L2CG9k1y lnxuEUAUQ/GZAWg3j5BDB1Uw3Ouqhz+m5p/HVgjE5opBhZzP3msRC8It2fPAmk/WUajK BungfNzbs1z1xPpiF/0IbiC53Cy/Gh1Ar5eVCgKra0YqBmeempO6EJG5AWDNFfErAESb dExuJxZjpB5AK84mCP/65vTcXVKYt7wNlWKkinqmM+1TUfpyjvSMqi/5LsTebbkMTTTx e/Ug== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531eokKg7Mh1ifRFix2Y5Cgr1t4Jo666InWv5asbJI/KHITAFlQU AFergvh2ErGcN1OUgIpkL5G+/r32KtLpMMmeNdxyQzQSAU8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxRUMf5sQycCXGkEuj/EKigOcgtde7shkZI5a81dl0vp/lzl1Rwfs20p5s4YS6CwJznKpx+HeEgO2OnNAfX8k4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:8f:: with SMTP id l15mr6781431ilm.119.1600243146559; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:59:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200916040110.GA46039@FreeBSD.org> <9fcf11e9-6466-3660-5322-997ed8cb3ca7@freebsd.org> <20200916073731.GA45977@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200916073731.GA45977@FreeBSD.org> From: Aryeh Friedman Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 03:58:53 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is there any performance difference between udev and evdev in xorg? To: Alexey Dokuchaev Cc: Niclas Zeising , FreeBSD Mailing List , freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Brsth3pZ7z4Pdb X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=erHMiUDa; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of aryehfriedman@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=aryehfriedman@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.89 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.98)[-0.983]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36:c]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.98)[-0.978]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.93)[-0.926]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions,freebsd-x11]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.33 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:59:09 -0000 Sorry to top post but there seems to be a message missing in the thread On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:37 AM Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 08:41:28AM +0200, Niclas Zeising wrote: > > On 2020-09-16 06:01, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:55:31PM -0400, Aryeh Friedman wrote: > > >> What if any is the performance difference between udev and evdev when > > >> configuring xorg? Also do I need to use one or the other consistently > > >> or can I intermix them? > > > > > > If you don't need them (e.g. because this is desktop system without > > > fancy input devices), you'd better off with disabling both of them > > > altogether and use good old traditional way, that is, simply install > > > xf86-input-{keyboard,mouse} and let X.org handle those peripherals. > > > > > > Yes, you would still be able to plug and unplug your USB mice and > > > they will be detected and working as expected. > > > > > > TL;DR: DEVD/UDEV support is overrated and usually not needed at all. > > > > This is bad advice. > > OK, let's see why is it bad. :-) > > > The DEVD support in xorg-server might go away, since it is a FreeBSD > > only solution and the udev/evdev is similar to what is used on Linux. > > Does this imply that DEVD support in X.org is technically inferior to > udev/evdev, or it might get deprecated just because they prefer Linux > way, regardless of the actual design and implementation quality? Kind > of tangentially related question, but this might help to foresee what > to expect from future X.org development. > > > If you are using Wayland, it is also the only way to use input devices. > > Wayland is overrated and unneeded as well. Plus, we're discussing X11 > here and X.org server in particular, how's that even relevant? > > > If you are using the default configuration of xorg on FreeBSD 12.1 or > > later, using udev is the default. This means using xf86-input-libinput > > as the input device driver in X, and not xf86-input-{keyboard,mouse}. > > This gives much better support for things like synaptics touchpads and > > similar devices. > > Like I've said initially, these might come handy, but for "desktop system > without fancy input devices", what's the point of bringing another layer > of abstraction (xf86-input-libinput) rather then let X.org talk to device > drivers drivers directly and not having to deal with evdev/libinput bugs, > tinker with sysctls (kern.evdev.rcpt_mask), etc.? > > > You can configure such devices either by adding X configuration snippets > > to /usr/local/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/ or by using xinput on the command line > > Right, and with the old way, device configuration snippets are not needed. > Just that simple. So, the advice does not look that bad after all. :-) > > TL;DR: if there's a simpler solution/approach which is sufficient for one's > needs, e.g. for simple three-button mouse and pc104 keyboard, just dump the > extra xf86-input-libinput bloat and stick to old, well-tested, solid code > which just works(tm). > > ./danfe > -- Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org