Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(1683)

Unified Diff: services/ui/public/interfaces/display/output_protection.mojom

Issue 2675743002: PPAPI: Make output protection API work with mus+ash (Closed)
Patch Set: Fix review issue Created 3 years, 10 months ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View side-by-side diff with in-line comments
Download patch
Index: services/ui/public/interfaces/display/output_protection.mojom
diff --git a/services/ui/public/interfaces/display/output_protection.mojom b/services/ui/public/interfaces/display/output_protection.mojom
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f9ab3fbfc2b4c033c65ee7551caaeb2c71860b6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/services/ui/public/interfaces/display/output_protection.mojom
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// Copyright 2017 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+module display.mojom;
+
+// An interface for clients that are allowed to control the display output
+// content protection. Multiple clients can request content protection at
+// the same time, and the display will be protected until all clients are
+// closed or set |desired_method_mask| to 0 with |SetContentProtection|.
+interface OutputProtection {
+ // Queries link status and protection status.
+ QueryContentProtectionStatus(int64 display_id) => (bool success,
+ uint32 link_mask,
dcheng 2017/02/15 06:26:52 Nit: document link_mask too
Peng 2017/02/15 16:15:33 Done.
+ uint32 protection_mask);
+
+ // Requests the desired protection methods.
+ // |protection_mask| is the desired protection methods, which is a bitmask
+ // of the ContentProtectionMethod values. When the interface is closed,
+ // the content protection mask will be reverted.
dcheng 2017/02/15 06:26:52 Will these/can we declare these constants in this
dcheng 2017/02/15 06:27:20 (Or have a pointer to where they're defined =)
Peng 2017/02/15 16:15:33 Done.
Peng 2017/02/15 16:15:33 Probably it is not necessary, we don't have use ca
+ // Return true on success. Return false, if it failed to make the protection
dcheng 2017/02/15 06:26:52 Nit: no comma after false
Peng 2017/02/15 16:15:33 Done.
+ // request on the given display.
+ SetContentProtection(int64 display_id,
+ uint32 desired_method_mask) => (bool success);
+};

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698