From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:30:52 +0000 Message-ID: <20171207143052.533e1e94@alans-desktop> References: <20171130030907.26848-1-seanpaul@chromium.org> <20171130030907.26848-2-seanpaul@chromium.org> <20171205102840.GB12982@amd> <20171205104538.b4fxdjad3c46koas@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171205104538.b4fxdjad3c46koas@phenom.ffwll.local> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Daniel Vetter Cc: David Airlie , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Pavel Machek , Daniel Vetter , Sean Paul , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org > 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 ? Alan