libei and graphics tablets stylus support

While you (yes, you! no, not you, the one behind you) have been sweltering in the heatwaves of the northern hemispheres (Assisted-by: AI), I've been busy adding graphics tablet support to libei. This is scheduled for the soon to be released libei 1.7.0.

The initial work was done by Jason Gerecke and Josh Dickens from Wacom, I've been extending, polishing and testing it for the last few weeks.

Also, upfront: this only covers the stylus part of a tablet, we do not yet have an implementation for the "pad" part (the buttons, dials, rings, strips).

libei is, of course, the library for Emulated Input, a good-enough transport layer for sending logical input events between processes. We're already using libei as part of the XDG Portal Remote Desktop and Input Capture portals where we've been busy hurtling key and pointer events between the participating parties (and soon gesture events and text).

In the next release of libei, we will now also have "ei stylus" capabilities, i.e. the ability to send tablet stylus events. Getting pointer, keyboard and touch events supported was a long undertaking, everything was new and shiny and needed to be added everywhere in the stack. Now that all this is in place, scuffed and scratched, adding tablet events will be quite simple.

The ei stylus interface

Here's a short outline of how libei handles tablet events because it is, of course, different to how libinput handles them. Logical events are much nicer after all than physical hardware events.

First: we have a new interface: "ei_stylus". An EIS implementation (e.g. your compositor) may provide you, the libei client, with a device that supports this interface and one or more associated regions (typically representing the available screen areas). Typically this will be a separate device to the pointer devices or the keyboard devices but it's not a requirement. The ei_stylus interface comes with a bunch of capabilities you'd expect from a stylus (tilt, pressure, distance, ...) that you can selectively enable to emulate the stylus you want to. So basically, EIS will say "here's a stylus device, I support pressure, tilt, rotation, ..." and then the libei client says "This stylus should have pressure and tilt but nothing else". And then you do the normal thing: send proximity events, send tip down/up events, send data for the various capabilities you've enabled.

Happily for the EIS implementation, libei forces the client to take the guesswork out of everything: if you select the pressure capability, you must send a pressure value when coming into proximity. Where libei is used to forward data from a physical stylus (e.g. via some remoting protocol) it is up to the client to deal with firmware bugs that e.g. won't send data until a few frames in.

Note that there is no "tablet" anywhere. The tablet is represented by the region that the device may interact with. So in some ways every tablet is an on-screen tablet (which makes sense since we have logical events).

Multiple styli

The only quirky thing is how to request multiple styli[1]: libei 1.5.0 has added a "request device" request that allows a client to say "hey, EIS, I want a new device with capabilities pointer, keyboard, ...". And, if you've been a nice client, minding your own business, the EIS implementation may just create such a device for you.

So for the case of multiple styli: if the default stylus (if any) isn't good enough, you can now tell EIS that you want a(nother) device with stylus capability, configure the stylus capabilities once the device shows up and voila, you now have a normal pen, an art pen and maybe even an airbrush represented as logical device in libei. And since they're all separate devices in the protocol, they can be individually tracked and used, much like libinput tracks individual styli.

[1] For the "lots" of users that actually use multiple styli...

libei and gesture events

/me gestures vaguely at everything

Oh, hey, this works now? Great!

libei 1.7.0 (to be released soon) comes with a new interface: "ei_gestures" which, creatively, will allow for gestures to be sent between a libei client and an EIS implementation (typically: a Wayland compositor).

I'm not going to go too deeply into how pinch, swipe and hold gestures work, suffice to say we've had those in libinput (for touchpads) for years now so compositors and toolkits should already support those. And since libei and libinput have vaguely equivalent API layers integrating gestures for libei devices in compositors should be fairly straightforward.

The plumbing layers in the portals exist already too, so adding gestures to libei means that - once the compositors support it - we can have gestures support in remote desktop and input capture implementations without needing to update anything else. Hooray! Join in with me. Hooray! Louder! HOORAY!

For testing I had a (vibe-coded and thus immediately abandoned once testing was complete) gesturemouse utility which translates input events from a mouse into gesture events (depending which button is down). But don't let my lack of be a limit to your imagination, I'm sure you can come up with good use-cases for this.

libei and keysym/text events

If you've been paying attention (and I know you have, because it'd be embarrassing for you if you didn't) you'd have noticed that libei 1.6 (May 2026) added support for keysym and text events.

libei sends logical events between a libei client and an EIS implementation (typically: a Wayland compositor) but the keyboard interface it had was designed like real keyboards: key codes together with an (XKB) key map. You press one key, the keymap decides what that key means on the compositor side and off we go. This is easy but not always useful.

As of 1.6.0 libei now also supports an "ei_text" interface. A compositor may choose to provide you[0] with a device that supports this interface and that gives you two really nice opportunities.

First, you can now send a key sym. Instead of sending the KEY_Q key code and hoping it actually translates to 'q' (and if there's e.g. a frenchman^Wfrenchperson lurking behind the keyboard it may mean 'a'), you can now send 'q' as actual keysym. Or 'Q' instead of sending shift+q and hoping for no french influence in the process. It becomes the EIS implementation's job to handle that keysym - if it's a shortcut it may handle it directly, otherwise it may pass it on via Wayland to an application[1]. This centralises the keysym to keycode handling in the EIS implementation which is a pain for compositor authors (though they likely have that code already for e.g. RDP support) but reduces the variety of differently-wrong implementations in clients and of course makes it so much simpler to write clients.

Second, a client can send UTF-8 text to the compositor. So instead of emulating shift, keycodes, etc. you can literally send "Hello World" and expect the EIS implementation to pass that one. Again, makes a bunch of utilities a lot simpler to write and I mostly leave it up to your imagination to figure out what to do with that.

Notably for both cases: libei is about logical events that have a specific meaning that do not need further interpretation. If a client sends 'Q' that means it is supposed to be an uppercase Q. Sending keysym Shift_L and Q makes little sense. And for the utf8 text events: how the text comes to be matters doesn't matter for libei so you may use an IM to make up the text to begin with and send it, once committed, to EIS. It's not for sending partial strings.

As mentioned in the previous post: the plumbing for this is already in place so both clients and compositors can add support for this new interface without having to bother the rest of the stack (e.g. portals). So, hooray I guess.

The text/keysym support is relatively recent so expect this to hit the next compositor version (or the one after that).

[0]: the EIS implementation decides which devices are available and arguing about this is even less useful than arguing with a world cup ref
[1]: after converting it to a key code with possible keymap changes... but hey, such is life

libei integrations in the XDG RemoteDesktop and InputCapture portals

Turns out it's been years since I've talked about eggs, so let's change this. libei is, of course, the library for Emulated Input[1].

This post is mostly a refresher because it's been so long and a short summary of some of the work we've done so far, in preparation for some more posts that come soon.

libei is a transport layer for logical input events, unlike libinput which is a hardware abstraction layer. In libinput's case the device's firmare/kernel pass events that are somewhere on the sanity spectrum, libinput tries to make sense of those and then we convert those to logical events to be consumed by the next layer (typically the Wayland compositor or Xorg). This is how e.g. "touch down at position x1/y1, touch up at position x1/y2" is converted into a button click event if touchpad tapping is enabled. Or maybe into nothing if we find it was an accidental palm touch.

libei works purely on the logical level - you as the libei client pass logical events to the EIS (Emulated Input Server) implementation (typically the compositor). No guesswork, you say button click, EIS gets a button click. libei supports a "sender" and "receiver" mode, depending on whether events are sent to the EIS implementation (input emulation) or receive from the EIS implementation (input capture). libei is designed for the Wayland stack but there are zero requirements for Wayland on either the client or the EIS implementation.

Core to libei's design is that the EIS implementation is in control of virtually everything, it decides which devices are available to the client, when those devices can send events, etc. Much like the compositor is in charge when it comes to physical devices - if a compositor decides a physical device doesn't exist, a Wayland client cannot get events from it.

Since the original proposal (again, [1]!) we've been busy bees and libei is now a part of the XDG Remote Desktop portal and the XDG Input Capture (both since version 1.17, mid 2023). In both cases the portal is for the negotiation and initial agreement of what should happen, libei is then used as the transport layer between the two processes [2].

More recently we also added session persistence support so you don't have to allow access on every connecton. Much of the work enabling this was done by Jonas Ådahl, it is now in the portals since version 1.21.0 and should be in the major compositors in the current or next versions.

Plumbing the Pipes

Getting all this into place was a huge amount of work across several pieces of the stack. This isn't exciting in the same way as laying plumbing pipes isn't particularly exciting but much like regular plumbing: once it's in place you can change your diet without severely impacting everyone again. Try get that analogy out of your head now. You're welcome.

In libei's case this means three things:

• if you have a client that uses the XDG portals to send/receive events they will now work with any compositor that implements the portal. No need for GNOME/KDE/... specific APIs.
• if you have a compositor that implements EIS you have all the infrastructure in place to talk to libei clients from somewhere else, if need be. The use-cases for this aren't fully scoped yet (assisitive technologies, virtual keyboards, touchpads, etc?) but the piping is there and ready to be (ab)used .
• since the actual events back and forth don't affect the layers in between, we can now add new events to libei without having to change everything else again.

Let's look at how this works in practice.

The XWayland XTEST use-case

An example for such a case where we can now abuse the piping is Xwayland support for XTEST. XTEST is the protocol that everyone uses to emulate input under X but in Wayland it's not hooked up to anything so those APIs simply won't work.

But what we can do in Xwayland is translate XTEST to libei events and facilitate the portal interaction. This means our stack looks roughly like this:

    +--------------------+             +------------------+
    | Wayland compositor |---wayland---| Wayland client B |
    +--------------------+\            +------------------+
    | libinput |   EIS   | \_wayland______
    +----------+---------+                \
        |          |           +-------+------------------+
 /dev/input/       +-----------| libei |     XWayland     |
                               +-------+------------------+
                                                |
                                                | XTEST
                                                |
                                         +-----------+
                                         |  X client |
                                         +-----------+

And if said X client uses XTEST to try to emulate devices, Xwayland will ask the Remote Desktop portal for permission and set up the session, then pass the XTEST events on as libei events and voila - your 20 year old X client can send pointer and keyboard events through an XDG Portal without knowing about it (and the user can prohibit this and even gets some information on who is sending events which is not possible with normal XTEST at all). This has now been supported since Xwayland 23.2.0. Compositors don't need extra support for this.

What's next

So we have a lot of the plumbing in place, or in another anology: we have a hammer, let's go looking for nails. And right now the nails we can see are sending text, gestures, and tablet support. And those will be the subject of the next few posts.

[1]: 6 years ago?! whoah...
[2]: in Remote Desktop's case replacing the DBus emulation APIs which were a Newton's Cradle of wakeups for at least 4 processes per event

Huion devices in the desktop stack

This post attempts to explain how Huion tablet devices currently integrate into the desktop stack. I'll touch a bit on the Huion driver and the OpenTablet driver but primarily this explains the intended integration[1]. While I have access to some Huion devices and have seen reports from others, there are likely devices that are slightly different. Huion's vendor ID is also used by other devices (UCLogic and Gaomon) so this applies to those devices as well.

This post was written without AI support, so any errors are organic artisian hand-crafted ones. Enjoy.

The graphics tablet stack

First, a short overview of the ideal graphics tablet stack in current desktops. At the bottom is the physical device which contains a significant amount of firmware. That device provides something resembling the HID protocol over the wire (or bluetooth) to the kernel. The kernel typically handles this via the generic HID drivers [2] and provides us with an /dev/input/event evdev node, ideally one for the pen (and any other tool) and one for the pad (the buttons/rings/wheels/dials on the physical tablet). libinput then interprets the data from these event nodes, passes them on to the compositor which then passes them via Wayland to the client. Here's a simplified illustration of this:

Unlike the X11 api, libinput's API works both per-tablet and per-tool basis. In other words, when you plug in a tablet you get a libinput device that has a tablet tool capability and (optionally) a tablet pad capability. But the tool will only show up once you bring it into proximity. Wacom tools have sufficient identifiers that we can a) know what tool it is and b) get a unique serial number for that particular device. This means you can, if you wanted to, track your physical tool as it is used on multiple devices. No-one [3] does this but it's possible. More interesting is that because of this you can also configure the tools individually, different pressure curves, etc. This was possible with the xf86-input-wacom driver in X but only with some extra configuration, libinput provides/requires this as the default behaviour.

The most prominent case for this is the eraser which is present on virtually all pen-like tools though some will have an eraser at the tail end and others (the numerically vast majority) will have it hardcoded on one of the buttons. Changing to eraser mode will create a new tool (the eraser) and bring it into proximity - that eraser tool is logically separate from the pen tool and can thus be configured differently. [4]

Another effect of this per-tool behaviour is also that we know exactly what a tool can do. If you use two different styli with different capabilities (e.g. one with tilt and 2 buttons, one without tilt and 3 buttons), they will have the right bits set. This requires libwacom - a library that tells us, simply: any tool with id 0x1234 has N buttons and capabilities A, B and C. libwacom is just a bunch of static text files with a C library wrapped around those. Without libwacom, we cannot know what any individual tool can do - the firmware and kernel always expose the capability set of all tools that can be used on any particular tablet. For example: wacom's devices support an airbrush tool so any tablet plugged in will announce the capabilities for an airbrush even though >99% of users will never use an airbrush [5].

The compositor then takes the libinput events, modifies them (e.g. pressure curve handling is done by the compositor) and passes them via the Wayland protocol to the client. That protocol is a pretty close mirror of the libinput API so it works mostly the same. From then on, the rest is up to the application/toolkit.

Notably, libinput is a hardware abstraction layer and conversion of hardware events into others is generally left to the compositor. IOW if you want a button to generate a key event, that's done either in the compositor or in the application/toolkit. But the current versions of libinput and the Wayland protocol do support all hardware features we're currently aware of: the various stylus types (including Wacom's lens cursor and mouse-like "puck" devices) and buttons, rings, wheels/dials, and touchstrips on pads. We even support the rather once-off Dell Canvas Totem device.

Huion devices

Huion's devices are HID compatible which means they "work" out of the box but they come in two different modes, let's call them firmware mode and tablet mode. Each tablet device pretends to be three HID devices on the wire and depending on the mode some of those devices won't send events.

Firmware mode

This is the default mode after plugging the device in. Two of the HID devices exposed look like a tablet stylus and a keyboard. The tablet stylus is usually correct (enough) to work OOTB with the generic kernel drivers, it exports the buttons, pressure, tilt, etc. The buttons and strips/wheels/dials on the tablet are configured to send key events. For example, the Inspiroy 2S I have sends b/i/e/Ctrl+S/space/Ctrl+Alt+z for the buttons and the roller wheel sends Ctrl-/Ctrl= depending on direction. The latter are often interpreted as zoom in/out so hooray, things work OOTB. Other Huion devices have similar bindings, there is quite some overlap but not all devices have exactly the same key assignments for each button. It does of course get a lot more interesting when you want a button to do something different - you need to remap the key event (ideally without messing up your key map lest you need to type an 'e' later).

The userspace part is effectively the same, so here's a simplified illustration of what happens in kernel land:

Any vendor-specific data is discarded by the kernel (but in this mode that HID device doesn't send events anyway).

Tablet mode

If you read a special USB string descriptor from the English language ID, the device switches into tablet mode. Once in tablet mode, the HID tablet stylus and keyboard devices will stop sending events and instead all events from the device are sent via the third HID device which consists of a single vendor-specific report descriptor (read: 11 bytes of "here be magic"). Those bits represent the various features on the device, including the stylus features and all pad features as buttons/wheels/rings/strips (and not key events!). This mode is the one we want to handle the tablet properly. The kernel's hid-uclogic driver switches into tablet mode for supported devices, in userspace you can use e.g. huion-switcher. The device cannot be switched back to firmware mode but will return to firmware mode once unplugged.

Once we have the device in tablet mode, we can get true tablet data and pass it on through our intended desktop stack. Alas, like ogres there are layers.

hid-uclogic and udev-hid-bpf

Historically and thanks in large parts to the now-discontinued digimend project, the hid-uclogic kernel driver did do the switching into tablet mode, followed by report descriptor mangling (inside the kernel) so that the resulting devices can be handled by the generic HID drivers. The more modern approach we are pushing for is to use udev-hid-bpf which is quite a bit easer to develop for. But both do effectively the same thing: they overlay the vendor-specific data with a normal HID report descriptor so that the incoming data can be handled by the generic HID kernel drivers. This will look like this:

Notable here: the stylus and keyboard may still exist and get event nodes but never send events[6] but the uclogic/bpf-enabled device will be proper stylus/pad event nodes that can be handled by libinput (and thus the rest), with raw hardware data where buttons are buttons.

Challenges

Because in true manager speak we don't have problems, just challenges. And oh boy, we collect challenges as if we'd be organising the olypmics.

hid-uclogic and libinput

First and probably most embarrassing is that hid-uclogic has a different way of exposing event nodes than what libinput expects. This is largely my fault for having focused on Wacom devices and internalized their behaviour for long years. The hid-uclogic driver exports the wheels and strips on separate event nodes - libinput doesn't handle this correctly (or at all). That'd be fixable but the compositors also don't really expect this so there's a bit more work involved but the immediate effect is that those wheels/strips will likely be ignored and not work correctly. Buttons and pens work.

udev-hid-bpf and huion-switcher

hid-uclogic being a kernel driver has access to the underlying USB device. The HID-BPF hooks in the kernel currently do not, so we cannot switch the device into tablet mode from a BPF, we need it in tablet mode already. This means a userspace tool (read: huion-switcher) triggered via udev on plug-in and before the udev-hid-bpf udev rules trigger. Not a problem but it's one more moving piece that needs to be present (but boy, does this feel like the unix way...).

Huion's precious product IDs

By far the most annoying part about anything Huion is that until relatively recently (I don't have a date but maybe until 2 years ago) all of Huion's devices shared the same few USB product IDs. For most of these devices we worked around it by matching on device names but there were devices that had the same product id and device name. At some point libwacom and the kernel and huion-switcher had to implement firmware ID extraction and matching so we could differ between devices with the same 0256:006d usb IDs. Luckily this seems to be in the past now with modern devices now getting new PIDs for each individual device. But if you have an older device, expect difficulties and, worse, things to potentially break after firmware updates when/if the firmware identification string changes. udev-hid-bpf (and uclogic) rely on the firmware strings to identify the device correctly.

edit: and of course less than 24h after posting this I process a bug report about two completely different new devices sharing one of the product IDs

udev-hid-bpf and hid-uclogic

Because we have a changeover from the hid-uclogic kernel driver to the udev-hid-bpf files there are rough edges on "where does this device go". The general rule is now: if it's not a shared product ID (see above) it should go into udev-hid-bpf and not the uclogic driver. Easier to maintain, much more fire-and-forget. Devices already supported by udev-hid-bpf will remain there, we won't implement BPFs for those (older) devices, doubly so because of the aforementioned libinput difficulties with some hid-uclogic features.

Reverse engineering required

The newer tablets are always slightly different so we basically need to reverse-engineer each tablet to get it working. That's common enough for any device but we do rely on volunteers to do this. Mind you, the udev-hid-bpf approach is much simpler than doing it in the kernel, much of it is now copy-paste and I've even had quite some success to get e.g. Claude Code to spit out a 90% correct BPF on its first try. At least the advantage of our approach to change the report descriptor means once it's done it's done forever, there is no maintenance required because it's a static array of bytes that doesn't ever change.

Plumbing support into userspace

Because we're abstracting the hardware, userspace needs to be fully plumbed. This was a problem last year for example when we (slowly) got support for relative wheels into libinput, then wayland, then the compositors, then the toolkits to make it available to the applications (of which I think none so far use the wheels). Depending on how fast your distribution moves, this may mean that support is months and years off even when everything has been implemented. On the plus side these new features tend to only appear once every few years. Nonetheless, it's not hard to see why the "just sent Ctrl=, that'll do" approach is preferred by many users over "probably everything will work in 2027, I'm sure".

So, what stylus is this?

A currently unsolved problem is the lack of tool IDs on all Huion tools. We cannot know if the tool used is the two-button + eraser PW600L or the three-button-one-is-an-eraser-button PW600S or the two-button PW550 (I don't know if it's really 2 buttons or 1 button + eraser button). We always had this problem with e.g. the now quite old Wacom Bamboo devices but those pens all had the same functionality so it just didn't matter. It would matter less if the various pens would only work on the device they ship with but it's apparently quite possible to use a 3 button pen on a tablet that shipped with a 2 button pen OOTB. This is not difficult to solve (pretend to support all possible buttons on all tools) but it's frustrating because it removes a bunch of UI niceties that we've had for years - such as the pen settings only showing buttons that actually existed. Anyway, a problem currently in the "how I wish there was time" basket.

Summary

Overall, we are in an ok state but not as good as we are for Wacom devices. The lack of tool IDs is the only thing not fixable without Huion changing the hardware[7]. The delay between a new device release and driver support is really just dependent on one motivated person reverse-engineering it (our BPFs can work across kernel versions and you can literally download them from a successful CI pipeline). The hid-uclogic split should become less painful over time and the same as the devices with shared USB product IDs age into landfill and even more so if libinput gains support for the separate event nodes for wheels/strips/... (there is currently no plan and I'm somewhat questioning whether anyone really cares). But other than that our main feature gap is really the ability for much more flexible configuration of buttons/wheels/... in all compositors - having that would likely make the requirement for OpenTabletDriver and the Huion tablet disappear.

OpenTabletDriver and Huion's own driver

The final topic here: what about the existing non-kernel drivers?

Both of these are userspace HID input drivers which all use the same approach: read from a /dev/hidraw node, create a uinput device and pass events back. On the plus side this means you can do literally anything that the input subsystem supports, at the cost of a context switch for every input event. Again, a diagram on how this looks like (mostly) below userspace:

Note how the kernel's HID devices are not exercised here at all because we parse the vendor report, create our own custom (separate) uinput device(s) and then basically re-implement the HID to evdev event mapping. This allows for great flexibility (and control, hence the vendor drivers are shipped this way) because any remapping can be done before you hit uinput. I don't immediately know whether OpenTabletDriver switches to firmware mode or maps the tablet mode but architecturally it doesn't make much difference.

From a security perspective: having a userspace driver means you either need to run that driver daemon as root or (in the case of OpenTabletDriver at least) you need to allow uaccess to /dev/uinput, usually via udev rules. Once those are installed, anything can create uinput devices, which is a risk but how much is up for interpretation.

[1] As is so often the case, even the intended state does not necessarily spark joy
[2] Again, we're talking about the intended case here...
[3] fsvo "no-one"
[4] The xf86-input-wacom driver always initialises a separate eraser tool even if you never press that button
[5] For historical reasons those are also multiplexed so getting ABS_Z on a device has different meanings depending on the tool currently in proximity
[6] In our udev-hid-bpf BPFs we hide those devices so you really only get the correct event nodes, I'm not immediately sure what hid-uclogic does
[7] At which point Pandora will once again open the box because most of the stack is not yet ready for non-Wacom tool ids

Why is my device a touchpad and a mouse and a keyboard?

If you have spent any time around HID devices under Linux (for example if you are an avid mouse, touchpad or keyboard user) then you may have noticed that your single physical device actually shows up as multiple device nodes (for free! and nothing happens for free these days!). If you haven't noticed this, run libinput record and you may be part of the lucky roughly 50% who get free extra event nodes.

The pattern is always the same. Assuming you have a device named FooBar ExceptionalDog 2000 AI[1] what you will see are multiple devices

/dev/input/event0: FooBar ExceptionalDog 2000 AI Mouse
/dev/input/event1: FooBar ExceptionalDog 2000 AI Keybard 
/dev/input/event2: FooBar ExceptionalDog 2000 AI Consumer Control 

The Mouse/Keyboard/Consumer Control/... suffixes are a quirk of the kernel's HID implementation which splits out a device based on the Application Collection. [2]

A HID report descriptor may use collections to group things together. A "Physical Collection" indicates "these things are (on) the same physical thingy". A "Logical Collection" indicates "these things belong together". And you can of course nest these things near-indefinitely so e.g. a logical collection inside a physical collection is a common thing.

An "Application Collection" is a high-level abstractions to group something together so it can be detected by software. The "something" is defined by the HID usage for this collection. For example, you'll never guess what this device might be based on the hid-recorder output:

# 0x05, 0x01,                    // Usage Page (Generic Desktop)              0
# 0x09, 0x06,                    // Usage (Keyboard)                          2
# 0xa1, 0x01,                    // Collection (Application)                  4
...
# 0xc0,                          // End Collection                            74

Yep, it's a keyboard. Pop the champagne[3] and hooray, you deserve it.

The kernel, ever eager to help, takes top-level application collections (i.e. those not inside another collection) and applies a usage-specific suffix to the device. For the above Generic Desktop/Keyboard usage you get "Keyboard", the other ones currently supported are "Keypad" and "Mouse" as well as the slightly more niche "System Control", "Consumer Control" and "Wireless Radio Control" and "System Multi Axis". In the Digitizer usage page we have "Stylus", "Pen", "Touchscreen" and "Touchpad". Any other Application Collection is currently unsuffixed (though see [2] again, e.g. the hid-uclogic driver uses "Touch Strip" and other suffixes).

This suffix is necessary because the kernel also splits out the data sent within each collection as separate evdev event node. Since HID is (mostly) hidden from userspace this makes it much easier for userspace to identify different devices because you can look at a event node and say "well, it has buttons and x/y, so must be a mouse" (this is exactly what udev does when applying the various ID_INPUT properties, with varying levels of success).

The side effect of this however is that your device may show up as multiple devices and most of those extra devices will never send events. Sometimes that is due to the device supporting multiple modes (e.g. a touchpad may by default emulate a mouse for backwards compatibility but once the kernel toggles it to touchpad mode the mouse feature is mute). Sometimes it's just laziness when vendors re-use the same firmware and leave unused bits in place.

It's largely a cosmetic problem only, e.g. libinput treats every event node as individual device and if there is a device that never sends events it won't affect the other event nodes. It can cause user confusion though: "why does my laptop say there's a mouse?" and in some cases it can cause functional degradation - the two I can immediately recall are udev detecting the mouse node of a touchpad as pointing stick (because i2c mice aren't a thing), hence the pointing stick configuration may show up in unexpected places. And fake mouse devices prevent features like "disable touchpad if a mouse is plugged in" from working correctly. At the moment we don't have a good solution for detecting these fake devices - short of shipping giant databases with product-specific entries we cannot easily detect which device is fake. After all, a Keyboard node on a gaming mouse may only send events if the user configured the firmware to send keyboard events, and the same is true for a Mouse node on a gaming keyboard.

So for now, the only solution to those is a per-user udev rule to ignore a device. If we ever figure out a better fix, expect to find a gloating blog post in this very space.

[1] input device naming is typically bonkers, so I'm just sticking with precedence here
[2] if there's a custom kernel driver this may not apply and there are quirks to change this so this isn't true for all devices
[3] or sparkling wine, let's not be regionist here

xkeyboard-config 2.45 has a new install location

This is a heads ups that if you install xkeyboard-config 2.45 (the package that provides the XKB data files), some manual interaction may be needed. Version 2.45 has changed the install location after over 20 years to be a) more correct and b) more flexible.

When you select a keyboard layout like "fr" or "de" (or any other ones really), what typically happens in the background is that an XKB parser (xkbcomp if you're on X, libxkbcommon if you're on Wayland) goes off and parses the data files provided by xkeyboard-config to populate the layouts. For historical reasons these data files have resided in /usr/share/X11/xkb and that directory is hardcoded in more places than it should be (i.e. more than zero). As of xkeyboard-config 2.45 however, the data files are now installed in the much more sensible directory /usr/share/xkeyboard-config-2 with a matching xkeyboard-config-2.pc for anyone who relies on the data files. The old location is symlinked to the new location so everything keeps working, people are happy, no hatemail needs to be written, etc. Good times.

The reason for this change is two-fold: moving it to a package-specific directory opens up the (admittedly mostly theoretical) use-case of some other package providing XKB data files. But even more so, it finally allows us to start versioning the data files and introduce new formats that may be backwards-incompatible for current parsers. This is not yet the case however, the current format in the new location is guaranteed to be the same as the format we've always had, it's really just a location change in preparation for future changes.

Now, from an upstream perspective this is not just hunky, it's also dory. Distributions however struggle a bit more with this change because of packaging format restrictions. RPM for example is quite unhappy with a directory being replaced by a symlink which means that Fedora and OpenSuSE have to resort to the .rpmmoved hack. If you have ever used the custom layout and/or added other files to the XKB data files you will need to manually move those files from /usr/share/X11/xkb.rpmmoved/ to the new equivalent location. If you have never used that layout and/or modified local you can just delete /usr/share/X11/xkb.rpmmoved. Of course, if you're on Wayland you shouldn't need to modify system directories anyway since you can do it in your $HOME.

Corresponding issues on what to do on Arch and Gentoo, I'm not immediately aware of other distributions's issues but if you search for them in your bugtracker you'll find them.