Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-212220-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 23:25:07 +0300
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas.dufresne@collabora.com>
Cc: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>,
	Yunfei Dong <yunfei.dong@mediatek.com>,
	Jeffrey Kardatzke <jkardatzke@google.com>,
	=?utf-8?B?TsOtY29sYXMgRiAuIFIgLiBBIC4=?= Prado <nfraprado@collabora.com>,
	Nathan Hebert <nhebert@chromium.org>,
	Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@collabora.com>,
	Sebastian Fricke <sebastian.fricke@collabora.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org>, Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com>,
	Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org>,
	Fritz Koenig <frkoenig@chromium.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Steve Cho <stevecho@chromium.org>,
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	Brian Starkey <Brian.Starkey@arm.com>,
	John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
	"T . J . Mercier" <tjmercier@google.com>,
	Christian =?utf-8?B?S8O2bmln?= <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6,04/24] v4l: add documentation for restricted memory
 flag
Message-ID: <20240612202507.GT28989@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
References: <20240516122102.16379-1-yunfei.dong@mediatek.com>
 <20240516122102.16379-5-yunfei.dong@mediatek.com>
 <20240522111622.GA31185@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
 <bhgv5djcjc4yt75pyug2yirrymeucjyslthnvq6k2kpp7axfph@jzo5wpcbgwun>
 <33d38919f3f94b6e1848aaee20cf52ac9c1df606.camel@collabora.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <33d38919f3f94b6e1848aaee20cf52ac9c1df606.camel@collabora.com>

On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 03:43:58PM -0400, Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 juin 2024 à 13:37 +0900, Tomasz Figa a écrit :
> > > Why is this flag needed ? Given that the usage model requires the V4L2
> > > device to be a dma buf importer, why would userspace set the
> > > V4L2_BUF_CAP_SUPPORTS_RESTRICTED_MEM flag and pass a non-restricted
> > > buffer to the device ?
> > 
> > Given that the flag is specified at REQBUF / CREATE_BUFS time, it's
> > actually useful to tell the driver the queue is operating in restricted
> > (aka secure) mode.
> > 
> > I suppose we could handle that at the time of a first QBUF, but that
> > would make the driver initialization and validation quite a bit of pain.
> > So I'd say that the design being proposed here makes things simpler and
> > more clear, even if it doesn't add any extra functionality.
> 
> There is few more reasons I notice in previous series (haven't read the latest):
> 
> - The driver needs to communicate through the OPTEE rather then SCP and some
> communication are needed just to figure-out things like supported profile/level
> resolutions etc.
> - The driver needs to allocate auxiliary buffers in secure heap too, allocation
> at runtime are not the best

Will the same driver support both modes on the same system ?

> Note that the discussion around this flag already took place in the very first
> iteration of the serie, it was originally using a CID and that was a proposed
> replacement from Hans.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart