p0358

Don't worry, you're damn right about the quality of those things. They have crap flashes, they're slow and fail all the time, even most of the "better" ones. I'm shocked sometimes at how much people can trust these devices for some reason

Nah the page is outdated, I saw on Reddit they also forgot about certs 77 days ago already

But the social media affect all those people in reality sadly, they normalize this crap and embolden it

Except it will prevent you from mutating many of its system files. I mean it's not a good argument for a former Windows user, unless they get a sudden urge to tinker with all possible system files on Linux (which is possible to do on immutable systems in one way or another, but it's much harder and not as straightforward) 

Likely transmitter range issue, I really doubt it'd help for that

By consent of others, whoever registered there will be forced to that outcome even if they disagree. I fail to see how that's a good thing

Yeah, holy fuck. I only clearly saw it when the mask was taken off, that was actually ridiculous

8K poll rate is the maximum for USB 2.0 devices (or rather faster than USB 1.1 speed ones), so you cannot achieve anything higher than that, at least not with this method (I don't know if the host hardware can be even forced to poll higher, that could be an interesting project to try at some point maybe).

Did you actually benchmark that it can poll this high btw? We found an interesting thing with DualSense controllers that were frequently mentioned that they poll at 8K, but it turns out it might be only motion sensors, and the actual controller part that people would care about is only still 1K basically...

would them need this DKMS module to allow it to reach the 8K pool rate

And if I understood you correctly, your mouse has web-based settings portal that allows you to set the polling rate there? If so then that module won't give you anything further, as it's meant for devices that don't expose such a setting for the user to choose, and yet they can be forced to be polled higher nonetheless (that seems more common with controllers than pro mice, but there are mouses like that out there too)

Personally only controllers (my own mouse and keyboard already poll at 1000 Hz, suffering from success...). I can't imagine it'd go too well with something like a drive xD It's also worth noting it only overclocks Interrupt endpoint, and not other types like Isochronous, since they're not used for input stuff and their bInterval values mean different things. But I wish I could find some other goofy device to try where there'd be a chance it could do anything other than breaking everything...

arrows go vroom

Ah, my friend happens to have the exact same mouse. Unfortunately, we tested it, and apparently the wireless dongle it's using already polls at 1000 Hz aka bInterval 1 (probably the dongle was made with wider mouse model support range in mind), so unfortunately we weren't able to overclock it at all with this method... :( (we only did his Sony DualSense controller) Well, that's unless you'd happen to have a different revision or something where that maybe wouldn't apply? Also I see it has USB-C plus and I'm embarrassed to admit we didn't try that, so who knows xD

He saw how 1000 Hz feels on my machine and said he wants to replace his mouse ever since, since that smoothness feeling has stuck in his mind ever since lol

Well, it's not that there's a particular "problem" in a sense like a bug. But it's that if the device can be pushed further, and thus by higher polling we achieve lower effective input latency and slightly smoother input, then why wouldn't we do it? The same way gamers get higher refresh rate screens (and sometimes yet try to push them further), or other devices.

As for the implementation, my module is partially based on a patchset for actual kernel module, but it's unclear to me if it was tried to be upstreamed or why it failed if so. But it clearly didn't make it in, and there's no sign of that changing any time soon. Maybe the kernel devs would consider it "unorthodox" to alter the descriptor parameters against what the manufacturer intended.

But some devices do allow themselves to be polled higher and will just sample the inputs more often, if their firmware and sensors are capable of it. In fact, many "gaming" mice have a proprietary software that uses a proprietary protocol (this often has a Linux equivalent like Sonaar for Logitech) to set on-device settings where it'll reconnect reporting different bInterval (requested polling rate) to the host based on what was set. And yet the manufacturers will by default use some "safe default" setting like 125 or 250 at most, just to avoid any potential issues on some devices and thus RMA costs, with opt-in options of 500 and 1000. But some manufacturers don't bother making such an option or an app at all, so that's where this module comes in. And especially for controllers, it's much less common to see such an option even if the app is there, even though high amount of non-Microsoft controllers do allow such overclocking (Microsoft ones at 125 Hz locked are pathetic, you can feel the latency difference between that and my 250 Hz controller overclocked to 500 Hz side-by-side).

But TL;DR is that it's just a gamer optimization, and one that isn't quite easily possible with upstream kernel currently. Some kernel modules do have some options for some degree of overclocking, but e.g. one of them has a bug that it didn't work with USB 3 devices, so yeah...