Wayland content-protection extension

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:58:28 -0500
Matt Hoosier <matt.hoosier at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:54 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > did you intend to reply on list? Please CC if you did.
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:35:56 -0500
> > Matt Hoosier <matt.hoosier at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 3:59 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com>  
> > wrote:  
> > >  
> > > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:38:09 +0530
> > > > Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c at intel.com> wrote:
> > > >  
> > > > > On Monday 18 June 2018 01:34 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:  
> > > > > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 12:50:52 +0530
> > > > > > Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c at intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > >  
> > > >  
> > > > > > How does the kernel signal to userspace that the HDCP status has
> > > > > > changed? Do you piggyback on the hotplug event?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anything that would require userspace to repeatedly re-read  
> > properties  
> > > > > > without any events triggering it is bad design. If nothing is
> > > > > > happening, the compositor needs to be able to stay asleep.  
> > > > > Pekka,
> > > > >
> > > > > We proposed a uevent from kernel for indicating the HDCP status  
> > change.  
> > > > > But that didn't fly. Right now the merged interface expects  
> > compositor  
> > > > > to poll
> > > > > the property state for the runtime failures.  
> > > >
> > > > Ugh. :-(
> > > >  
> > >
> > > I get what you mean here, but maybe it's not actually that bad. The HDCP
> > > runtime failure polling would really only be needed during times when at
> > > least one video stream is actually using it, right? If that's true, then
> > > the compositor is regularly waking up as the clients submit successive
> > > buffers anyway. Can the HDCP connector status polling get folded into  
> > that  
> > > wakeup cycle?  
> >
> > Sure, but you are assuming the protected content is video. I'm thinking
> > of still images.
> >  
> 
> Yeah, that's a fair point. Still probably covers the dominant use-case
> though? Just curious, are you referring to the still images that result
> from pausing a video stream, or first-class static images (maybe photos or
> something) covered by content protection too?

Anything that can actually sit still on the screen.


Thanks,
pq
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20180618/caff29f7/attachment-0001.sig>