From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52377A31; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 06:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738565619; cv=none; b=BQutZOWNbI9WDkKo05gFCySiUP5NQRYSXdM6Hz2XhCeuXa2h3dvbKHgarZgm6bfL/DghAwnxyxrJ9D8n56GH6ceVQRQzsGoCUvIjcYIfwop1krCghpIVAi7DZ2DWiNPOuQLTy1qE+Ne7jKmZP3+73FctY5v4igyPZK0rvo1R2Vk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738565619; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wNHkO8AYBkpkeZDZHNXEfxSSONXKnyJtfYDwnwALPM8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=U0jVWDnnrKrK+mGsIxEenR/tnxKHUrscSrz53g5okWWJXk1Ef/mk7digpQxGYe0LUgDoHZGWrOugpyhvK9Mki6YW6YcgWXUAhWvrhGwZvMeclkgOM+CKLzrkA44OL5nYDLHfLexIANvTA8Qbnz/OKXkVxc6iyHK4srL7wmqo5uw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 303E467373; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 07:53:32 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 07:53:31 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Anuj Gupta Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, kbusch@kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, asml.silence@gmail.com, anuj1072538@gmail.com, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, vishak.g@samsung.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Kanchan Joshi Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/10] block: introduce BIP_CHECK_GUARD/REFTAG/APPTAG bip_flags Message-ID: <20250203065331.GA16999@lst.de> References: <20241128112240.8867-1-anuj20.g@samsung.com> <20241128112240.8867-8-anuj20.g@samsung.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241128112240.8867-8-anuj20.g@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Hi Anuj, I just stumbled over this patch when forward porting my XFS PI support code over the weekend, which failed badly because it didn't set the new BIP_CHECK_GUARD and BIP_CHECK_REFTAG flags. Now for the XFS side that was just me being to lazy to forward port, but when I started looking over bio_integrity_add_page users as part of doing this I think I found a regression caused by this patch. The scsi and nvme targets never sets these new flags when passing on PI, so that will probably stop working. So we'll need to set them and for nvmet we could also improve the code to actually pass through the individual flags. Note that this is just by observation, I didn't find time to actually set up the SCSI and NVMe target code with PI support. Maybe we also need blktests test cases to exercise the code and avoid regressions in the future?