On 2020-01-28 at 21:14:44 +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote:
> On 2020-01-28 at 16:19:31 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Content Protection property should be updated as per the kernel
> > > internal state. Let's say if Content protection is disabled
> > > by userspace, CP property should be set to UNDESIRED so that
> > > reauthentication will not happen until userspace request it again,
> > > but when kernel disables the HDCP due to any DDI disabling sequences
> > > like modeset/DPMS operation, kernel should set the property to
> > > DESIRED, so that when opportunity arises, kernel will start the
> > > HDCP authentication on its own.
> > >
> > > Somewhere in the line, state machine to set content protection to
> > > DESIRED from kernel was broken and IGT coverage was missing for it.
> > > This patch fixes it.
> > > IGT patch to catch further regression on this features is being
> > > worked upon.
> > >
> > > CC: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 4 +++
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.h | 2 ++
> > > 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > index da5266e76738..934cdf1f1858 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > @@ -14595,6 +14595,10 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > goto fail;
> > >
> > > if (any_ms) {
> > > + /*
> > > + * When there is modeset fix the hdcp uapi CP state.
> > > + */
> > > + intel_hdcp_post_need_modeset_check(state);
> > > ret = intel_modeset_checks(state);
> > > if (ret)
> > > goto fail;
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c
> > > index 0fdbd39f6641..be083136eee2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c
> > > @@ -2074,6 +2074,32 @@ void intel_hdcp_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > > crtc_state->mode_changed = true;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/**
> > > + * intel_hdcp_post_need_modeset_check.
> > > + * @state: intel atomic state.
> > > + *
> > > + * This function fix the HDCP uapi state when hdcp disabling initiated from
> > > + * modeset DDI disabling sequence. It updates uapi CP state from ENABLED to
> > > + * DESIRED so that HDCP uapi state can be restored as per HDCP Auth state.
> > > + * This function should be called only in case of in case of modeset.
> > > + * FIXME: As per HDCP content protection property uapi doc, an uevent()
> > > + * need to be sent if there is transition from ENABLED->DESIRED.
> > > + */
> > > +void intel_hdcp_post_need_modeset_check(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > +{
> > > + struct drm_connector *connector;
> > > + struct drm_connector_state *old_state;
> > > + struct drm_connector_state *new_state;
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + for_each_oldnew_connector_in_state(&state->base, connector, old_state,
> > > + new_state, i) {
> > > + if (old_state->content_protection == DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_ENABLED &&
> > > + new_state->content_protection != DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED)
> > > + new_state->content_protection = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > Why does this feel like duplication of what you already have in
> > intel_hdcp_atomic_check()?
> intel_hdcp_atomic_check() have checks that for disconnected connector and it doesn't look for
typo here, "intel_hdcp_atomic_check() checks that for disconnected connector and it doesn't check for new state shouldn't be UNDESIRED"
> old state, that is not sufficient to fix the hdcp CP uapi state, it need to be fix only in case of
> modeset, Later on a fastset check can disable the modeset and we would endup calling intel_hdcp_enable
> while hdcp is already enabled. That is the reason i think we would require a new API to
> fix the uapi state.
> Thanks ,
> Anshuman Gupta.
> >
> > BR,
> > Jani.
> >
> >
> > > /* Handles the CP_IRQ raised from the DP HDCP sink */
> > > void intel_hdcp_handle_cp_irq(struct intel_connector *connector)
> > > {
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.h
> > > index f3c3272e712a..7bf46bc3c348 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.h
> > > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> > > struct drm_connector;
> > > struct drm_connector_state;
> > > struct drm_i915_private;
> > > +struct intel_atomic_state;
> > > struct intel_connector;
> > > struct intel_hdcp_shim;
> > > enum port;
> > > @@ -21,6 +22,7 @@ enum transcoder;
> > > void intel_hdcp_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > > struct drm_connector_state *old_state,
> > > struct drm_connector_state *new_state);
> > > +void intel_hdcp_post_need_modeset_check(struct intel_atomic_state *state);
> > > int intel_hdcp_init(struct intel_connector *connector,
> > > const struct intel_hdcp_shim *hdcp_shim);
> > > int intel_hdcp_enable(struct intel_connector *connector,
> >
> > --
> > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
