On Thursday 15 February 2018 01:10 AM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018, "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This patch defines the hdcp2.2 protocol messages for the
HDCP2.2 authentication.
Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@xxxxxxxxx>
---
include/drm/drm_hdcp.h | 226
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 226 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h b/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h index
562fa7df2637..9661c700cebb 100644
--- a/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
+++ b/include/drm/drm_hdcp.h
@@ -38,4 +38,230 @@
#define DRM_HDCP_DDC_BSTATUS 0x41
#define DRM_HDCP_DDC_KSV_FIFO 0x43
+#define DRM_HDCP_1_4_SRM_ID 0x8
+#define DRM_HDCP_1_4_VRL_LENGTH_SIZE 3
+#define DRM_HDCP_1_4_DCP_SIG_SIZE 40
+
+struct cp_srm_header {
+ struct {
+ uint8_t reserved_hi:4;
+ uint8_t srm_id:4;
+ uint8_t reserved_lo;
+ } spec_indicator;
Do you really want to work with bit fields? I mean in all the all structures.
We *can't* use bitfields in drm core for (un)marshalling. They depend on
endianness. (Thanks to folks on #dri-devel for confirming.) We use them
at places in i915 where we can be pretty sure about running on
little-endian machines, but that doesn't hold here.
Packed structs are fine otherwise though, just not bitfields.
Thanks Jani. I will rework on that.
--Ram
BR,
Jani.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
