[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v12 01/15] i915_drm.h sync
Teres Alexis, Alan Previn
alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com
Tue Oct 5 07:07:49 UTC 2021
My bad... yes I meant signed-off.
...alan
________________________________
From: Latvala, Petri <petri.latvala at intel.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 12:05:17 AM
To: Teres Alexis, Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com>
Cc: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org <igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v12 01/15] i915_drm.h sync
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 03:39:35PM -0700, Alan Previn wrote:
> Sync UAPI for to get GEM_CREATE_EXT's I915_OBJECT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT
> and GEM_CONTEXT_CREATE's I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT
>
> Taken from kernel commit:
> commit d3ac8d42168a9be7380be8035df8b6d3780ec2a1
> ("drm/i915/pxp: interfaces for using protected objects.")
>
> Reviewed-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com>
You probably meant Signed-off-by.
--
Petri Latvala
> ---
> include/drm-uapi/i915_drm.h | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/drm-uapi/i915_drm.h b/include/drm-uapi/i915_drm.h
> index f4691fcc..6e81f6ea 100644
> --- a/include/drm-uapi/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/drm-uapi/i915_drm.h
> @@ -1815,6 +1815,55 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_context_param {
> * attempted to use it, never re-use this context param number.
> */
> #define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_RINGSIZE 0xc
> +
> +/*
> + * I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT:
> + *
> + * Mark that the context makes use of protected content, which will result
> + * in the context being invalidated when the protected content session is.
> + * Given that the protected content session is killed on suspend, the device
> + * is kept awake for the lifetime of a protected context, so the user should
> + * make sure to dispose of them once done.
> + * This flag can only be set at context creation time and, when set to true,
> + * must be preceded by an explicit setting of I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_RECOVERABLE
> + * to false. This flag can't be set to true in conjunction with setting the
> + * I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_BANNABLE flag to false. Creation example:
> + *
> + * .. code-block:: C
> + *
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_context_create_ext_setparam p_protected = {
> + * .base = {
> + * .name = I915_CONTEXT_CREATE_EXT_SETPARAM,
> + * },
> + * .param = {
> + * .param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT,
> + * .value = 1,
> + * }
> + * };
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_context_create_ext_setparam p_norecover = {
> + * .base = {
> + * .name = I915_CONTEXT_CREATE_EXT_SETPARAM,
> + * .next_extension = to_user_pointer(&p_protected),
> + * },
> + * .param = {
> + * .param = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_RECOVERABLE,
> + * .value = 0,
> + * }
> + * };
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_context_create_ext create = {
> + * .flags = I915_CONTEXT_CREATE_FLAGS_USE_EXTENSIONS,
> + * .extensions = to_user_pointer(&p_norecover);
> + * };
> + *
> + * ctx_id = gem_context_create_ext(drm_fd, &create);
> + *
> + * In addition to the normal failure cases, setting this flag during context
> + * creation can result in the following errors:
> + *
> + * -ENODEV: feature not available
> + * -EPERM: trying to mark a recoverable or not bannable context as protected
> + */
> +#define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT 0xd
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> __u64 value;
> @@ -2931,8 +2980,12 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext {
> *
> * For I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT_MEMORY_REGIONS usage see
> * struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_memory_regions.
> + *
> + * For I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT_PROTECTED_CONTENT usage see
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_protected_content.
> */
> #define I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT_MEMORY_REGIONS 0
> +#define I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT_PROTECTED_CONTENT 1
> __u64 extensions;
> };
>
> @@ -2990,6 +3043,47 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_memory_regions {
> __u64 regions;
> };
>
> +/**
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_protected_content - The
> + * I915_OBJECT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT extension.
> + *
> + * If this extension is provided, buffer contents are expected to be protected
> + * by PXP encryption and require decryption for scan out and processing. This
> + * is only possible on platforms that have PXP enabled, on all other scenarios
> + * using this extension will cause the ioctl to fail and return -ENODEV. The
> + * flags parameter is reserved for future expansion and must currently be set
> + * to zero.
> + *
> + * The buffer contents are considered invalid after a PXP session teardown.
> + *
> + * The encryption is guaranteed to be processed correctly only if the object
> + * is submitted with a context created using the
> + * I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PROTECTED_CONTENT flag. This will also enable extra checks
> + * at submission time on the validity of the objects involved.
> + *
> + * Below is an example on how to create a protected object:
> + *
> + * .. code-block:: C
> + *
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_protected_content protected_ext = {
> + * .base = { .name = I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT_PROTECTED_CONTENT },
> + * .flags = 0,
> + * };
> + * struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext create_ext = {
> + * .size = PAGE_SIZE,
> + * .extensions = (uintptr_t)&protected_ext,
> + * };
> + *
> + * int err = ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CREATE_EXT, &create_ext);
> + * if (err) ...
> + */
> +struct drm_i915_gem_create_ext_protected_content {
> + /** @base: Extension link. See struct i915_user_extension. */
> + struct i915_user_extension base;
> + /** @flags: reserved for future usage, currently MBZ */
> + __u32 flags;
> +};
> +
> /* ID of the protected content session managed by i915 when PXP is active */
> #define I915_PROTECTED_CONTENT_DEFAULT_SESSION 0xf
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/igt-dev/attachments/20211005/73058bfe/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list