There is now a mailing list for virglrenderer library hosted at freedesktop. It is to be used for development discussion of the virgl->GL renderer library and for patches to it.
The git tree is also now hosted at:
My personal repo will only be used for my own development stuff.
I'll also get a freedesktop patchwork instance set up for this asap.
I'm also contemplating bugzilla vs phabricator.
So I've still been working on the virgil3d project along with part time help from Marc-Andre and Gerd at Red Hat, and we've been making steady progress. This post is about a test harness I just finished developing for adding and debugging GL features.
So one of the more annoying issuess with working on virgil has been that while working on adding 3D renderer features or trying to track down a piglit failure, you generally have to run a full VM to do so. This adds a long round trip in your test/development cycle.
I'd always had the idea to do some sort of local system renderer, but there are some issues with calling GL from inside a GL driver. So my plan was to have a renderer process which loads the renderer library that qemu loads, and a mesa driver that hooks into the software rasterizer interfaces. So instead of running llvmpipe or softpipe I have a virpipe gallium wrapper, that wraps my virgl driver and the sw state tracker via a new vtest winsys layer for virgl.
So the virgl pipe driver sits on top of the new winsys layer, and the new winsys instead of using the Linux kernel DRM apis just passes the commands over a UNIX socket to a remote server process.
The remote server process then uses EGL and the renderer library, forks a new copy for each incoming connection and dies off when the rendering is done.
The final rendered result has to be read back over the socket, and then the sw winsys is used to putimage the rendering onto the screen.
So this system is probably going to be slower in raw speed terms, but for developing features or debugging fails it should provide an easier route without the overheads of the qemu process. I was pleasantly surprised it only took two days to pull most of this test harness together which was neat, I'd planned much longer for it!
The code lives in two halves.
[updated: pushed into the main branches]
Also the virglrenderer repo is standalone now, it also has a bunch of unit tests in it that are run using valgrind also, in an attempt to lock down some more corners of the API and test for possible ways to escape the host.
I'm not sure
but if hd0;u]; means anything to anyone from displaylink, or is the first unencrypted bytes they send, then oops.
Looks like I have some work to do next week.
okay another braindump (still nothing working).
The git repo mentioned in previous post has all the code I've hacked up so far.
I finished writing the HDCP protocol stages, and sending all the msgs and getting replies from the device.
So I've successfully reached a point where I've negotiated a HDCP session key with the device, and we are both happy about it. Unfortunately I've no idea what I'm meant to be encrypting to send to the device. The next packet the USB traces contain is 384-bytes of encrypted data.
Now HDCP v2 had a vulnerabilty in its key neg, and I've written code to try and use this fact. So I've taken a trace I made from Windows, and extracted the necessary bits, and using that I've managed to derive the master key used in that trace, and subsequently managed to derived the session key for it. So I've replayed the first encrypted packet from the trace to the device and got an encrypted response the same as in the trace.
I've tried changing a bit in the session key, riv value and data I'm sending, and doing that causes the device not to reply with the answer. This to me implies that the device is using the HDCP cipher to encode the control channel. Now HDCP does say you should only do this for video streams, but maybe DisplayLink forgot to read that bit.
Now where does this leave me, in theory I should be able to replay the full trace (haven't had time yet) and I should see the same picture on screen as I did (though I can't remember what monitor/device I used, so I might have to retrace and restage my tests before then).
However I really need to decrypt the encrypted data in the trace, and from reading the HDCP spec the only values I need to feed the AES engine are ks ^ lc128, riv, streamctr, inputctr. I'm assuming streamctr and inputctr are 0 for the first packet (I could be wrong, maybe they use some wacky streamctr to avoid messing with hdcp), riv and ks I've captured. So lc128 is possibly the crux.
Now what is lc128? Its a secret 128-bit value in the HDCP world given only to HDCP adopters. Its normally something you'd store in hw on the GPU etc as an input to the hw cipher. But in displaylink there is no GPU encrypting the data. Now its possible that displaylink don't use the same lc128 as the HDCP people, unlikely but possible. Maybe they cipher their streams with their own lc128, and only use the offical hdcp lc128 for actual HDCP streams.
I don't think lc128 has leaked, I'm not sure what the consequences of it leaking would be, but hey its just a magic number, and if displaylink are using as an input to their AES code, it must be in RAM at some point, now I need to figure out ways to work that out. I'm not sure how long it would take to brute force as 128-bit key space, probably impossible.
At any point if someone from DisplayLink wants to talk, you know where to find me :-)
So for some reason I decided to look at the displaylink usb3 adaptors today. (no good news).
This blog post is so I don't forget all of this when I page it out. Notes, HDCP1.0 being broken doesn't matter to this, maybe HDCPv2.0 being a bit broken could be used, but I'm not sure how!
The displaylink USB3 protocol is based on HDCP protocol. I've traced the first few packets and it clearly
looks like the host sends two packets
and the device sends back
AKE_Send_Cert contains a 522 byte certificate, containing a receiver id, public key, some misc bytes and a signature generated with the DCP LLC private key, that you have to verify.
so the HDCP v2.2 spec contains the DP LLC public key, and I've written some code to verify the spec using openssl, but it totally fails to work. This is probably due to me doing something stupid, or not understanding what I'm doing, if you are openssl knowledgeable and want to look, the hack fest is
It might be the DisplayLink devices use a different signing key than the DP LLC one.
That repo contains some code to talk to the device (currently disabled) and do the initial sequence, along with an attempt to verify the cert.
Now once I get past this hurdle, the larger one seems to remain, the HDCP 2.0 spec has a global secret 128-bit value called LC128, that everyone who implements HDCP gets and hides somewhere. Its probably sitting in the displaylink driver in hex, but I'd hope they at least hide it better than that. It may also be possibly supplied by the OS, Windows or OSX. (I've no clue yet). That value is used in the key negotiation.
Now it might be possible that Displaylink allow non-HDCP encrypted data to be sent to the device, in which case win if I can find out where/how to do that, or it might be the device requires HDCP and decrypts non-HDCP content before sending it over VGA/DVI. I've no ideas yet on that front either.
Ah well probably enough learning for today, I knew nothing about HDCP this morning, so I can't say it made my life any better learning about it :-P
or why publishing code is STEP ZERO.
If you've been developing code internally for a kernel contribution, you've probably got a lot of reasons not to default to working in the open from the start, you probably don't work for Red Hat or other companies with default to open policies, or perhaps you are scared of the scary kernel community, and want to present a polished gem.
If your company is a pain with legal reviews etc, you have probably spent/wasted months of engineering time on internal reviews and stuff, so think all of this matters later, because why wouldn't it, you just spent (wasted) a lot of time on it, so it must matter.
So you have your polished codebase, why wouldn't those kernel maintainers love to merge it.
Then you publish the source code.
Oh, look you just left your house. The merging of your code is many many miles distant and you just started walking that road, just now, not when you started writing it, not when you started legal review, not when you rewrote it internally the 4th time. You just did it this moment.
You might have to rewrite it externally 6 times, you might never get it merged, it might be something your competitors are also working on, and the kernel maintainers would rather you cooperated with people your management would lose their minds over, that is the kernel development process.
step zero: publish the code. leave the house.
(lately I've been seeing this problem more and more, so I decided to write it up, and it really isn't directed at anyone in particular, I think a lot of vendors are guilty of this).
So I've created a copr
With a kernel + intel driver that should provide support for DisplayPort MST on Intel Haswell hardware. It doesn't do any of the fancy Dell monitor stuff yet, it primarily for people who have Lenovo or Dell docks and laptops that can't currently multihead.
The kernel source is from this branch which backports a chunk of stuff to v3.14 to support this.
It might still have some bugs and crashes, but the basics should in theory work.
DisplayPort 1.2 Multi-stream Transport is a feature that allows daisy chaining of DP devices that support MST into all kinds of wonderful networks of devices. Its been on the TODO list for many developers for a while, but the hw never quite materialised near a developer.
At the start of the week my local Red Hat IT guy asked me if I knew anything about DP MST, it turns out the Lenovo T440s and T540s docks have started to use DP MST, so they have one DP port to the dock, and then dock has a DP->VGA, DP->DVI/DP, DP->HDMI/DP ports on it all using MST. So when they bought some of these laptops and plugged in two monitors to the dock, it fellback to using SST mode and only showed one image. This is not optimal, I'd call it a bug :)
Now I have a damaged in transit T440s (the display panel is in pieces) with a dock, and have spent a couple of days with DP 1.2 spec in one hand (monitor), and a lot of my hair in the other. DP MST has a network topology discovery process that is build on sideband msgs send over the auxch which is used in normal DP to read/write a bunch of registers on the plugged in device. You then can send auxch msgs over the sideband msgs over auxch to read/write registers on other devices in the hierarchy!
Today I achieved my first goal of correctly encoding the topology discovery message and getting a response from the dock:
[ 2909.990743] link address reply: 4
[ 2909.990745] port 0: input 1, pdt: 1, pn: 0
[ 2909.990746] port 1: input 0, pdt: 4, pn: 1
[ 2909.990747] port 2: input 0, pdt: 0, pn: 2
[ 2909.990748] port 3: input 0, pdt: 4, pn: 3
There are a lot more steps to take before I can produce anything, along with dealing with the fact that KMS doesn't handle dynamic connectors so well, should make for a fun tangent away from the job I should be doing which is finishing virgil.
I've ordered another DP MST hub that I can plug into AMD and nvidia gpus that should prove useful later, also for doing deeper topologies, and producing loops.
Also some 4k monitors using DP MST as they are really two panels, but I don't have one of them, so unless one appears I'm mostly going to concentrate on the Lenovo docks for now.
So to enable OpenGL 3.3 on radeonsi required some patches backported to llvm 3.4, I managed to get some time to do this, and rebuilt mesa against the new llvm, so if you have an AMD GPU that is supported by radeonsi you should now see GL 3.3.
For F20 this isn't an option as backporting llvm is a bit tricky there, though I'm considering doing a copr that has a private llvm build in it, it might screw up some apps but for most use cases it might be fine.