[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 04/35] drm/i915: Initialize HDCP2.2
Daniel Vetter
daniel at ffwll.ch
Fri Dec 7 14:16:30 UTC 2018
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 10:24:26AM +0530, C, Ramalingam wrote:
>
> On 12/6/2018 3:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 04:13:02PM +0530, Ramalingam C wrote:
> > > Add the HDCP2.2 initialization to the existing HDCP1.4 stack.
> > With the comments below addressed the commit message is a bit untrue,
> > since this just wires up a basic hdcp2_supported flag in a few places.
> > Please make that clear.
> >
> > > v2:
> > > mei interface handle is protected with mutex. [Chris Wilson]
> > > v3:
> > > Notifiers are used for the mei interface state.
> > > v4:
> > > Poll for mei client device state
> > > Error msg for out of mem [Uma]
> > > Inline req for init function removed [Uma]
> > > v5:
> > > Rebase as Part of reordering.
> > > Component is used for the I915 and MEI_HDCP interface [Daniel]
> > > v6:
> > > HDCP2.2 uses the I915 component master to communicate with mei_hdcp
> > > - [Daniel]
> > > Required HDCP2.2 variables defined [Sean Paul]
> > > v7:
> > > intel_hdcp2.2_init returns void [Uma]
> > > Realigning the codes.
> > > v8:
> > > Avoid using bool structure members.
> > > MEI interface related changes are moved into separate patch.
> > > Commit msg is updated accordingly.
> > > intel_hdcp_exit is defined and used from i915_unload
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c at intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 2 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 3 +-
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 16 +++-
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c | 172 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c | 2 +-
> > > 5 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > index b1d23c73c147..fbedd5024afe 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > @@ -1755,6 +1755,8 @@ void i915_driver_unload(struct drm_device *dev)
> > > disable_rpm_wakeref_asserts(dev_priv);
> > > + intel_hdcp_exit(dev_priv);
> > This smells like a separate patch. Needs to be split out. Looking at the
> > implementation of intel_hdcp_exit I think it's papering over some unload
> > trouble. We should be shutting down all the outputs on driver unload,
> > which mei should be triggering (with the component stuff), which means
> > this code should be unecessary. But I'm not sure.
> >
> > Either way needs to be split out, but I think proper solution is to drop
> > it.
>
> As we discussed, during v7-->v8 i changed the component usage such that it wont affect i915 load/unload.
> During the first connector init, component master will be added. And during the mei_client dev and driver binding,
> component will be added hence the binding will happen with interface initialization from mei.
>
> Upon HDCP2.2 request, component binding will be checked before attempting for HDCP2.2 auth.
> So component master unbind triggered due to mei component_del, will teardown the HDCP2.2 capability of the I915.
>
> So in case of I915 unload trigger, from whatsoever reason, we need to clear the HDCP activities and bring down
> the i915_hdcp_component_master and the interface with mei. For this purpose only intel_hdcp_exit is written here.
Summarizing our irc discussion:
- I like the component usage of v7 much more.
- I still don't think we have a use-case for loading/unloading mei_hdcp on
demand, or at least not in lockstep with i915.ko:
- CrOS won't use ME
- usual linux distros don't care about content protection, so won't even
enable the MEI_HDCP driver
- iotg/embedded either wants it (and then probably always) or doesn't
want it (in which case it won't be built in). Plus embedded tends to
have all built-in drivers anyway, so they all load in order.
And I don't want to review the validation coverage and locking and
runtime consequences of making this possible, since I'm lazy :-)
- I looked lockdep splat in v7 again in more detail. It's not actually an
issue with component usage, but just unlucky to now run into a
preexisting issue: Any driver you unbind through the sysfs file will
generate a lockdep splat if it removes any sysfs files itself. That's a
pre-existing bug, easily reproduced by unbinding i915.
Only thing new is that component connects the snd-hda-intel and i915
unload sequence through the component lock (but does _not_ create a
loop), and since we unbind snd-hda-intel through sysfs and i919
unregisters _lots_ of sysfs files lockdep now sees the cycle. It's
always been there.
I'm working on a separate patch to fix this.
Cheers, Daniel
>
> >
> > > +
> > > i915_driver_unregister(dev_priv);
> > > if (i915_gem_suspend(dev_priv))
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > index 18e3a5a3d873..ac62af073688 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > @@ -6675,7 +6675,8 @@ intel_dp_init_connector(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
> > > intel_dp_add_properties(intel_dp, connector);
> > > if (is_hdcp_supported(dev_priv, port) && !intel_dp_is_edp(intel_dp)) {
> > > - int ret = intel_hdcp_init(intel_connector, &intel_dp_hdcp_shim);
> > > + int ret = intel_hdcp_init(intel_connector, &intel_dp_hdcp_shim,
> > > + false);
> > > if (ret)
> > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HDCP init failed, skipping.\n");
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > > index a62d77b76291..85a526598096 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> > > @@ -388,6 +388,17 @@ struct intel_hdcp {
> > > u64 value;
> > > struct delayed_work check_work;
> > > struct work_struct prop_work;
> > > +
> > > + /* HDCP2.2 related definitions */
> > > + /* Flag indicates whether this connector supports HDCP2.2 or not. */
> > > + u8 hdcp2_supported;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Content Stream Type defined by content owner. TYPE0(0x0) content can
> > > + * flow in the link protected by HDCP2.2 or HDCP1.4, where as TYPE1(0x1)
> > > + * content can flow only through a link protected by HDCP2.2.
> > > + */
> > > + u8 content_type;
> > > };
> > > struct intel_connector {
> > > @@ -2016,12 +2027,15 @@ void intel_hdcp_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > > struct drm_connector_state *old_state,
> > > struct drm_connector_state *new_state);
> > > int intel_hdcp_init(struct intel_connector *connector,
> > > - const struct intel_hdcp_shim *hdcp_shim);
> > > + const struct intel_hdcp_shim *hdcp_shim,
> > > + bool hdcp2_supported);
> > > int intel_hdcp_enable(struct intel_connector *connector);
> > > int intel_hdcp_disable(struct intel_connector *connector);
> > > int intel_hdcp_check_link(struct intel_connector *connector);
> > > bool is_hdcp_supported(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum port port);
> > > bool intel_hdcp_capable(struct intel_connector *connector);
> > > +bool is_hdcp2_supported(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > > +void intel_hdcp_exit(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
> > > /* intel_psr.c */
> > > #define CAN_PSR(dev_priv) (HAS_PSR(dev_priv) && dev_priv->psr.sink_support)
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
> > > index 04ba6c13e715..99dddb540958 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdcp.c
> > > @@ -730,6 +730,65 @@ struct intel_connector *intel_hdcp_to_connector(struct intel_hdcp *hdcp)
> > > return container_of(hdcp, struct intel_connector, hdcp);
> > > }
> > > +/* Implements Part 3 of the HDCP authorization procedure */
> > > +int intel_hdcp_check_link(struct intel_connector *connector)
> > Spurious movement of this function. Please drop, or if you need this
> > function moved, split it out into a separate patch that only moves the
> > function around.
>
> Intention is gathering the hdcp1.4 functions together before implementing the hdcp2.2 code.
> But as you mentioned i will do it as a separate patch.
Ah yeah that makes sense, but commit message didn't explain that. Separate
patch sounds good.
-Daniel
>
> --Ram
>
> > > +{
> > > + struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
> > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = connector->base.dev->dev_private;
> > > + struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = conn_to_dig_port(connector);
> > > + enum port port = intel_dig_port->base.port;
> > > + int ret = 0;
> > > +
> > > + if (!hdcp->shim)
> > > + return -ENOENT;
> > > +
> > > + mutex_lock(&hdcp->mutex);
> > > +
> > > + if (hdcp->value == DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED)
> > > + goto out;
> > > +
> > > + if (!(I915_READ(PORT_HDCP_STATUS(port)) & HDCP_STATUS_ENC)) {
> > > + DRM_ERROR("%s:%d HDCP check failed: link is not encrypted,%x\n",
> > > + connector->base.name, connector->base.base.id,
> > > + I915_READ(PORT_HDCP_STATUS(port)));
> > > + ret = -ENXIO;
> > > + hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > + schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (hdcp->shim->check_link(intel_dig_port)) {
> > > + if (hdcp->value != DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED) {
> > > + hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_ENABLED;
> > > + schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > + }
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("[%s:%d] HDCP link failed, retrying authentication\n",
> > > + connector->base.name, connector->base.base.id);
> > > +
> > > + ret = _intel_hdcp_disable(connector);
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + DRM_ERROR("Failed to disable hdcp (%d)\n", ret);
> > > + hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > + schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = _intel_hdcp_enable(connector);
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + DRM_ERROR("Failed to enable hdcp (%d)\n", ret);
> > > + hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > + schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > +out:
> > > + mutex_unlock(&hdcp->mutex);
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static void intel_hdcp_check_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > > {
> > > struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = container_of(to_delayed_work(work),
> > > @@ -774,14 +833,34 @@ bool is_hdcp_supported(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum port port)
> > > !IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv) && port < PORT_E);
> > > }
> > > +bool is_hdcp2_supported(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > +{
> > > + return ((INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 10 || IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv) ||
> > > + IS_KABYLAKE(dev_priv)) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_MEI_HDCP));
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void intel_hdcp2_init(struct intel_connector *connector)
> > > +{
> > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(connector->base.dev);
> > > + struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
> > > +
> > > + WARN_ON(!is_hdcp2_supported(dev_priv));
> > > +
> > > + /* TODO: MEI interface needs to be initialized here */
> > > + hdcp->hdcp2_supported = 1;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > int intel_hdcp_init(struct intel_connector *connector,
> > > - const struct intel_hdcp_shim *shim)
> > > + const struct intel_hdcp_shim *shim,
> > > + bool hdcp2_supported)
> > > {
> > > struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
> > > int ret;
> > > - ret = drm_connector_attach_content_protection_property(
> > > - &connector->base);
> > > + if (!shim)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + ret = drm_connector_attach_content_protection_property(&connector->base);
> > > if (ret)
> > > return ret;
> > > @@ -789,9 +868,37 @@ int intel_hdcp_init(struct intel_connector *connector,
> > > mutex_init(&hdcp->mutex);
> > > INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&hdcp->check_work, intel_hdcp_check_work);
> > > INIT_WORK(&hdcp->prop_work, intel_hdcp_prop_work);
> > > +
> > > + if (hdcp2_supported)
> > > + intel_hdcp2_init(connector);
> > > +
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > +void intel_hdcp_exit(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > +{
> > > + struct drm_device *dev = &dev_priv->drm;
> > > + struct intel_connector *intel_connector;
> > > + struct drm_connector *connector;
> > > + struct drm_connector_list_iter conn_iter;
> > > +
> > > + drm_connector_list_iter_begin(dev, &conn_iter);
> > > + drm_for_each_connector_iter(connector, &conn_iter) {
> > > + intel_connector = to_intel_connector(connector);
> > > +
> > > + if (!intel_connector->hdcp.shim)
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> > > + intel_hdcp_disable(intel_connector);
> > > +
> > > + mutex_lock(&intel_connector->hdcp.mutex);
> > > + intel_connector->hdcp.hdcp2_supported = 0;
> > > + intel_connector->hdcp.shim = NULL;
> > > + mutex_unlock(&intel_connector->hdcp.mutex);
> > > + }
> > > + drm_connector_list_iter_end(&conn_iter);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > int intel_hdcp_enable(struct intel_connector *connector)
> > > {
> > > struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
> > > @@ -867,62 +974,3 @@ void intel_hdcp_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > > new_state->crtc);
> > > crtc_state->mode_changed = true;
> > > }
> > > -
> > > -/* Implements Part 3 of the HDCP authorization procedure */
> > > -int intel_hdcp_check_link(struct intel_connector *connector)
> > > -{
> > > - struct intel_hdcp *hdcp = &connector->hdcp;
> > > - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = connector->base.dev->dev_private;
> > > - struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = conn_to_dig_port(connector);
> > > - enum port port = intel_dig_port->base.port;
> > > - int ret = 0;
> > > -
> > > - if (!hdcp->shim)
> > > - return -ENOENT;
> > > -
> > > - mutex_lock(&hdcp->mutex);
> > > -
> > > - if (hdcp->value == DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED)
> > > - goto out;
> > > -
> > > - if (!(I915_READ(PORT_HDCP_STATUS(port)) & HDCP_STATUS_ENC)) {
> > > - DRM_ERROR("%s:%d HDCP check failed: link is not encrypted,%x\n",
> > > - connector->base.name, connector->base.base.id,
> > > - I915_READ(PORT_HDCP_STATUS(port)));
> > > - ret = -ENXIO;
> > > - hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > - schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > - goto out;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - if (hdcp->shim->check_link(intel_dig_port)) {
> > > - if (hdcp->value != DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_UNDESIRED) {
> > > - hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_ENABLED;
> > > - schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > - }
> > > - goto out;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("[%s:%d] HDCP link failed, retrying authentication\n",
> > > - connector->base.name, connector->base.base.id);
> > > -
> > > - ret = _intel_hdcp_disable(connector);
> > > - if (ret) {
> > > - DRM_ERROR("Failed to disable hdcp (%d)\n", ret);
> > > - hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > - schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > - goto out;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - ret = _intel_hdcp_enable(connector);
> > > - if (ret) {
> > > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Failed to enable hdcp (%d)\n", ret);
> > > - hdcp->value = DRM_MODE_CONTENT_PROTECTION_DESIRED;
> > > - schedule_work(&hdcp->prop_work);
> > > - goto out;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > -out:
> > > - mutex_unlock(&hdcp->mutex);
> > > - return ret;
> > > -}
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c
> > > index e2c6a2b3e8f2..e755a3370bca 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c
> > > @@ -2417,7 +2417,7 @@ void intel_hdmi_init_connector(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
> > > if (is_hdcp_supported(dev_priv, port)) {
> > > int ret = intel_hdcp_init(intel_connector,
> > > - &intel_hdmi_hdcp_shim);
> > > + &intel_hdmi_hdcp_shim, false);
> > > if (ret)
> > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HDCP init failed, skipping.\n");
> > The actual change left to wire hdcp2_supported seems ok with me, but hard
> > to tell without seeing more yet :-)
> > -Daniel
> >
> > > }
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > >
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list