All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 09:55:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171208085533.ekzgow4svhw7xnqz@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171207143052.533e1e94@alans-desktop>

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:30:52PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > If you want to actually lock down a machine to implement content
> > protection, then you need secure boot without unlockable boot-loader and a
> > pile more bits in userspace. 
> 
> So let me take my Intel hat off for a moment.
> 
> The upstream policy has always been that we don't merge things which
> don't have an open usable user space. Is the HDCP encryption feature
> useful on its own ? What do users get from it ?
> 
> If this is just an enabler for a lump of binary stuff in ChromeOS then I
> don't think it belongs, if it is useful standalone then it seems it does
> belong ?

The cros side is ofc all open source. dri-devel is extremely strict with
not taking anything that doesn't fullfil this requirement, probably more
strict than anyone else. Sean has the link in the cover letter of his
patch series.

For more context, here's our documented expectations about the userspace
side of any uapi addition to drm:

https://dri.freedesktop.org/docs/drm/gpu/drm-uapi.html#open-source-userspace-requirements

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 09:55:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171208085533.ekzgow4svhw7xnqz@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171207143052.533e1e94@alans-desktop>

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:30:52PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > If you want to actually lock down a machine to implement content
> > protection, then you need secure boot without unlockable boot-loader and a
> > pile more bits in userspace. 
> 
> So let me take my Intel hat off for a moment.
> 
> The upstream policy has always been that we don't merge things which
> don't have an open usable user space. Is the HDCP encryption feature
> useful on its own ? What do users get from it ?
> 
> If this is just an enabler for a lump of binary stuff in ChromeOS then I
> don't think it belongs, if it is useful standalone then it seems it does
> belong ?

The cros side is ofc all open source. dri-devel is extremely strict with
not taking anything that doesn't fullfil this requirement, probably more
strict than anyone else. Sean has the link in the cover letter of his
patch series.

For more context, here's our documented expectations about the userspace
side of any uapi addition to drm:

https://dri.freedesktop.org/docs/drm/gpu/drm-uapi.html#open-source-userspace-requirements

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: daniel@ffwll.ch (Daniel Vetter)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 09:55:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171208085533.ekzgow4svhw7xnqz@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171207143052.533e1e94@alans-desktop>

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:30:52PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > If you want to actually lock down a machine to implement content
> > protection, then you need secure boot without unlockable boot-loader and a
> > pile more bits in userspace. 
> 
> So let me take my Intel hat off for a moment.
> 
> The upstream policy has always been that we don't merge things which
> don't have an open usable user space. Is the HDCP encryption feature
> useful on its own ? What do users get from it ?
> 
> If this is just an enabler for a lump of binary stuff in ChromeOS then I
> don't think it belongs, if it is useful standalone then it seems it does
> belong ?

The cros side is ofc all open source. dri-devel is extremely strict with
not taking anything that doesn't fullfil this requirement, probably more
strict than anyone else. Sean has the link in the cover letter of his
patch series.

For more context, here's our documented expectations about the userspace
side of any uapi addition to drm:

https://dri.freedesktop.org/docs/drm/gpu/drm-uapi.html#open-source-userspace-requirements

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-08  8:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-30  3:08 [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/i915: Implement HDCP Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08   ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08   ` Sean Paul
2017-12-05 10:28   ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 10:28     ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 10:28     ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 10:45     ` Daniel Vetter
2017-12-05 10:45       ` Daniel Vetter
2017-12-05 10:45       ` Daniel Vetter
2017-12-05 17:34       ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 17:34         ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 17:34         ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 17:53         ` Alex Deucher
2017-12-05 17:53           ` Alex Deucher
2017-12-05 17:53           ` Alex Deucher
2017-12-05 18:01           ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 18:01             ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-05 18:01             ` Pavel Machek
2017-12-07 14:32           ` Alan Cox
2017-12-07 14:32             ` Alan Cox
2017-12-05 19:03         ` Sean Paul
2017-12-05 19:03           ` Sean Paul
2017-12-05 19:03           ` Sean Paul
2017-12-05 20:14         ` Daniel Stone
2017-12-05 20:14           ` Daniel Stone
2017-12-05 20:14           ` Daniel Stone
2017-12-07 14:30       ` Alan Cox
2017-12-07 14:30         ` Alan Cox
2017-12-07 14:30         ` Alan Cox
2017-12-08  8:55         ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2017-12-08  8:55           ` Daniel Vetter
2017-12-08  8:55           ` Daniel Vetter
2017-11-30  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] drm: Add some HDCP related #defines Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08   ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] drm/i915: Add HDCP framework + base implementation Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08   ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  9:12   ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2017-12-01  7:23   ` Ramalingam C
2017-12-01  7:23     ` Ramalingam C
2017-12-01  7:36     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2017-12-01  7:36       ` Daniel Vetter
2017-12-01  8:36       ` [Intel-gfx] " Ramalingam C
2017-12-01  8:36         ` Ramalingam C
2017-12-01 14:13         ` Sean Paul
2017-12-01 14:13           ` Sean Paul
2017-12-01 14:12       ` [Intel-gfx] " Sean Paul
2017-12-01 14:16       ` Sean Paul
2017-12-01 14:16         ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] drm/i915: Add function to output Aksv over GMBUS Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:08   ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:09 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] drm/i915: Implement HDCP for HDMI Sean Paul
2017-11-30  3:09   ` Sean Paul
2017-12-01  7:31   ` Ramalingam C
2017-12-01  7:31     ` Ramalingam C
2017-11-30  3:09 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Implement HDCP for DisplayPort Sean Paul
2017-11-30  7:50 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/i915: Implement HDCP Daniel Vetter
2017-12-05 13:45   ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-12-05 14:45     ` Sean Paul
2017-11-30  9:07 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2017-11-30 10:05 ` Patchwork
2017-11-30 15:15 ` Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20171208085533.ekzgow4svhw7xnqz@phenom.ffwll.local \
    --to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=seanpaul@chromium.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.