On 2019-07-04 at 14:14:19 +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2019 21:57:44 +0530
> Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > drm function is defined and exported to update a connector's
> > content protection property state and to generate a uevent along
> > with it.
> >
> > Need ACK for the uevent from userspace consumer.
> >
> > v2:
> > Update only when state is different from old one.
> > v3:
> > KDoc is added [Daniel]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/drm/drm_hdcp.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c
> > index 75402463466b..f29b7abda51f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_hdcp.c
> > @@ -372,6 +372,10 @@ DRM_ENUM_NAME_FN(drm_get_hdcp_content_type_name,
> > *
> > * The content protection will be set to &drm_connector_state.content_protection
> > *
> > + * When kernel triggered content protection state change like DESIRED->ENABLED
> > + * and ENABLED->DESIRED, will use drm_hdcp_update_content_protection() to update
> > + * the content protection state of a connector.
> > + *
> > * Returns:
> > * Zero on success, negative errno on failure.
> > */
> > @@ -412,3 +416,31 @@ int drm_connector_attach_content_protection_property(
> > return 0;
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_connector_attach_content_protection_property);
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * drm_hdcp_update_content_protection - Updates the content protection state
> > + * of a connector
> > + *
> > + * @connector: drm_connector on which content protection state needs an update
> > + * @val: New state of the content protection property
> > + *
> > + * This function can be used by display drivers, to update the kernel triggered
> > + * content protection state change of a drm_connector. This function update the
> > + * new state of the property into the connector's state and generate an uevent
> > + * to notify the userspace.
> > + */
> > +void drm_hdcp_update_content_protection(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > + u64 val)
> > +{
>
> Hi,
>
> don't you need to ensure that 'val' cannot be UNDESIRED?
>
> > + struct drm_device *dev = connector->dev;
> > + struct drm_connector_state *state = connector->state;
> > +
> > + WARN_ON(!drm_modeset_is_locked(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex));
> > + if (state->content_protection == val)
when val==UNDESIRED even the state->content_protection also UNDESIRED.
Hence explicit check is not needed here.
-Ram
> > + return;
> > +
> > + state->content_protection = val;
> > + drm_sysfs_connector_status_event(connector,
> > + dev->mode_config.content_protection_property);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_hdcp_update_content_protection);
> > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h b/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
> > index 2970abdfaf12..dd864ac9ce85 100644
> > --- a/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
> > +++ b/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
> > @@ -292,4 +292,6 @@ bool drm_hdcp_check_ksvs_revoked(struct drm_device *dev,
> > u8 *ksvs, u32 ksv_count);
> > int drm_connector_attach_content_protection_property(
> > struct drm_connector *connector, bool hdcp_content_type);
> > +void drm_hdcp_update_content_protection(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > + u64 val);
> > #endif
>
> This patch is missing all UAPI documentation.
>
> Particularly important is the detail that the kernel will not send an
> event corresponding to userspace explicitly setting "Content
> Protection" to "Undesired". That is what you explained to me in the
> Weston MR !48, but I don't actually see it in the code here. It would
> be best to enforce that in the shared DRM code.
>
>
> Thanks,
> pq
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
