Fix G19 macro key handling on newer Linux systems#45
Open
MiQ71 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
|
Apparently OP's account got automatically shadow banned on GitHub for a bit, but it's back now. Just posting this here to make sure it's known that this PR exists now that it's actually visible. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
On Linux Mint 22 (Ubuntu 24.04 based), Logitech G19 macro keys only worked once after starting g19daemon.
The first key press was detected correctly, but subsequent G-key presses were ignored until the daemon was restarted.
Root Cause
The G19 macro interface (046d:c229) exposes endpoint 0x83 and produces additional 7-byte reports besides the actual macro key reports.
The current implementation uses a 4-byte buffer and does not correctly handle these additional reports.
Changes
buffer[0] != 0x02).Testing
Tested on:
Verified:
Related
This appears to resolve the behavior originally reported in issue #33.