On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:10:00PM +0530, Ramalingam C wrote:
Considering that HDCP2.2 is more secure than HDCP1.4, When a setup
supports HDCP2.2 and HDCP1.4, HDCP2.2 will be enabled.
v2:
Included few optimization suggestions [Chris Wilson]
Commit message is updated as per the rebased version.
v3:
No changes.
v4:
Extra comment added and Style issue fixed [Uma]
v5:
Rebased as part of patch reordering.
Flag is added for tracking hdcp2.2 encryption status.
Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C <ramalinga...@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 1 +
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c | 90 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
index 2eeb82b04953..7624388eecd5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
@@ -414,6 +414,7 @@ struct intel_hdcp {
/* HDCP2.2 related definitions */
bool hdcp2_supported;
+ bool hdcp2_in_use;
/*
* Content Stream Type defined by content owner. TYPE0(0x0) content can
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
index 32a1a3f39b65..b34e3b1587d6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
@@ -21,6 +21,60 @@
(enum hdcp_physical_port)(port))
static int intel_hdcp2_init(struct intel_connector *connector);
+static int _intel_hdcp2_enable(struct intel_connector *connector);
+static int _intel_hdcp2_disable(struct intel_connector *connector);
+static
+int intel_hdcp_read_valid_bksv(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
+ const struct intel_hdcp_shim *shim, u8 *bksv);
+static
+struct intel_digital_port *conn_to_dig_port(struct intel_connector *connector);
Please avoid forward declarations of static functions. Just place things
appropriately in the file.
+
+static bool panel_supports_hdcp(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = conn_to_dig_port(connector);
+ struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
+ bool capable = false;
+ u8 bksv[5];
+
+ if (hdcp->hdcp_shim) {
This function can only be called from
intel_hdcp_enable() -> intel_hdcp_capable() -> panel_supports_hdcp()
Both of those preceding functions check if hdcp_shim is NULL.
+ if (hdcp->hdcp_shim->hdcp_capable) {
+ hdcp->hdcp_shim->hdcp_capable(intel_dig_port, &capable);
+ } else {
+ if (!intel_hdcp_read_valid_bksv(intel_dig_port,
+ hdcp->hdcp_shim, bksv))
+ capable = true;
+ }
+ }
+
+ return capable;
+}
+
+static inline
+bool panel_supports_hdcp2(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = conn_to_dig_port(connector);
+ struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
+ bool capable = false;
+
+ /* Check the panel's hdcp2.2 compliance if platform supports it. */
+ if (hdcp->hdcp2_supported)
+ hdcp->hdcp_shim->hdcp_2_2_capable(intel_dig_port, &capable);
+
+ return capable;
+}
+
+/* Is HDCP1.4 capable on Platform and Panel */
+static inline bool intel_hdcp_capable(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ return (connector->hdcp.hdcp_shim && panel_supports_hdcp(connector));
As mentioned, the hdcp_shim check is already covered by the caller. The way
things are setup, the shim checks only need to exist at the entry points
(enable/disable/check_link).
+}
+
+/* Is HDCP2.2 capable on Platform and Panel */
+static inline bool intel_hdcp2_capable(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ return (connector->hdcp.hdcp2_supported &&
+ panel_supports_hdcp2(connector));
+}
The panel_supports_* functions don't seem necessary, just do the work in the
intel_hdcp*_capable functions.
static int intel_hdcp_poll_ksv_fifo(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
const struct intel_hdcp_shim *shim)
@@ -796,20 +850,27 @@ int intel_hdcp_init(struct intel_connector *connector,
int intel_hdcp_enable(struct intel_connector *connector)
{
struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
- int ret;
+ int ret = -EINVAL;
if (!hdcp->hdcp_shim)
return -ENOENT;
mutex_lock(&hdcp->hdcp_mutex);
- ret = _intel_hdcp_enable(connector);
- if (ret)
- goto out;
+ /*
+ * Considering that HDCP2.2 is more secure than HDCP1.4, If the setup
+ * is capable of HDCP2.2, it is preferred to use HDCP2.2.
+ */
+ if (intel_hdcp2_capable(connector))
+ ret = _intel_hdcp2_enable(connector);
+ else if (intel_hdcp_capable(connector))
+ ret = _intel_hdcp_enable(connector);
+
+ if (!ret) {
+ hdcp->hdcp_value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_ENABLED;
+ schedule_work(&hdcp->hdcp_prop_work);
+ }
- hdcp->hdcp_value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_ENABLED;
- schedule_work(&hdcp->hdcp_prop_work);
-out:
mutex_unlock(&hdcp->hdcp_mutex);
return ret;
}
@@ -826,7 +887,10 @@ int intel_hdcp_disable(struct intel_connector *connector)
if (hdcp->hdcp_value != DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED) {
hdcp->hdcp_value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED;
- ret = _intel_hdcp_disable(connector);
+ if (hdcp->hdcp2_in_use)
+ ret = _intel_hdcp2_disable(connector);
+ else
+ ret = _intel_hdcp_disable(connector);
}
mutex_unlock(&hdcp->hdcp_mutex);
@@ -928,6 +992,16 @@ int intel_hdcp_check_link(struct intel_connector
*connector)
return ret;
}
+static int _intel_hdcp2_enable(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int _intel_hdcp2_disable(struct intel_connector *connector)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
nit: It'd probably be better to introduce the stubs with an error message, since
as you have it, you'll be able to "enable" HDCP2 without doing anything.
