On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 10:35:27AM -0500, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 9:47 AM Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 10:34:40PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > From: Stanley Zhang <[email protected]> > > > > > > If the UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_INTEGRITY flag is set, validate the integrity > > > parameters and apply them to the blk_integrity limits. > > > UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_INTEGRITY requires CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY=y, > > > UBLK_F_USER_COPY, and metadata_size > 0. Reuse the block metadata ioctl > > > LBMD_PI_CAP_* and LBMD_PI_CSUM_* constants from the linux/fs.h UAPI > > > header for the flags and csum_type field values. > > > The struct ublk_param_integrity validations are based on the checks in > > > blk_validate_integrity_limits(). Any invalid parameters should be > > > rejected before being applied to struct blk_integrity. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stanley Zhang <[email protected]> > > > [csander: add param validation] > > > Signed-off-by: Caleb Sander Mateos <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c > > > index 4da5d8ff1e1d..2893a9172220 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c > > > +++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c > > > @@ -42,10 +42,12 @@ > > > #include <linux/mm.h> > > > #include <asm/page.h> > > > #include <linux/task_work.h> > > > #include <linux/namei.h> > > > #include <linux/kref.h> > > > +#include <linux/blk-integrity.h> > > > +#include <uapi/linux/fs.h> > > > #include <uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h> > > > > > > #define UBLK_MINORS (1U << MINORBITS) > > > > > > #define UBLK_INVALID_BUF_IDX ((u16)-1) > > > @@ -81,11 +83,12 @@ > > > > > > /* All UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_* should be included here */ > > > #define UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_ALL \ > > > (UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_BASIC | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DISCARD | \ > > > UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DEVT | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_ZONED | \ > > > - UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DMA_ALIGN | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_SEGMENT) > > > + UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DMA_ALIGN | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_SEGMENT | \ > > > + UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_INTEGRITY) > > > > > > struct ublk_uring_cmd_pdu { > > > /* > > > * Store requests in same batch temporarily for queuing them to > > > * daemon context. > > > @@ -613,10 +616,57 @@ static void ublk_dev_param_basic_apply(struct > > > ublk_device *ub) > > > set_disk_ro(ub->ub_disk, true); > > > > > > set_capacity(ub->ub_disk, p->dev_sectors); > > > } > > > > > > +static int ublk_integrity_flags(u32 flags) > > > +{ > > > + int ret_flags = 0; > > > + > > > + if (flags & LBMD_PI_CAP_INTEGRITY) { > > > + flags &= ~LBMD_PI_CAP_INTEGRITY; > > > + ret_flags |= BLK_INTEGRITY_DEVICE_CAPABLE; > > > + } > > > + if (flags & LBMD_PI_CAP_REFTAG) { > > > + flags &= ~LBMD_PI_CAP_REFTAG; > > > + ret_flags |= BLK_INTEGRITY_REF_TAG; > > > + } > > > + return flags ? -EINVAL : ret_flags; > > > +} > > > + > > > +static int ublk_integrity_pi_tuple_size(u8 csum_type) > > > +{ > > > + switch (csum_type) { > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_NONE: > > > + return 0; > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_IP: > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_CRC16_T10DIF: > > > + return 8; > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_CRC64_NVME: > > > + return 16; > > > + default: > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + } > > > +} > > > + > > > +static enum blk_integrity_checksum ublk_integrity_csum_type(u8 csum_type) > > > +{ > > > + switch (csum_type) { > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_NONE: > > > + return BLK_INTEGRITY_CSUM_NONE; > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_IP: > > > + return BLK_INTEGRITY_CSUM_IP; > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_CRC16_T10DIF: > > > + return BLK_INTEGRITY_CSUM_CRC; > > > + case LBMD_PI_CSUM_CRC64_NVME: > > > + return BLK_INTEGRITY_CSUM_CRC64; > > > + default: > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1); > > > + return BLK_INTEGRITY_CSUM_NONE; > > > + } > > > +} > > > + > > > static int ublk_validate_params(const struct ublk_device *ub) > > > { > > > /* basic param is the only one which must be set */ > > > if (ub->params.types & UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_BASIC) { > > > const struct ublk_param_basic *p = &ub->params.basic; > > > @@ -675,10 +725,35 @@ static int ublk_validate_params(const struct > > > ublk_device *ub) > > > return -EINVAL; > > > if (p->max_segment_size < UBLK_MIN_SEGMENT_SIZE) > > > return -EINVAL; > > > } > > > > > > + if (ub->params.types & UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_INTEGRITY) { > > > + const struct ublk_param_integrity *p = > > > &ub->params.integrity; > > > + int pi_tuple_size = > > > ublk_integrity_pi_tuple_size(p->csum_type); > > > + int flags = ublk_integrity_flags(p->flags); > > > + > > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY)) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + if (!ublk_dev_support_user_copy(ub)) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > UBLK_IO_F_INTEGRITY should be checked here, and > > ublk_dev_support_user_copy() can be > > validated with UBLK_IO_F_INTEGRITY together in ublk_ctrl_add_dev(), so > > mis-matched features can be failed earlier. > > I'm not sure what you mean. UBLK_IO_F_INTEGRITY is a per-I/O flag set
I misread it as feature flag of `UBLK_F_INTEGRITY`... > in struct ublksrv_io_desc's op_flags field. Are you suggesting adding > a separate feature flag for integrity? I can do that, but I didn't > originally because none of the other UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_* flags have > associated features. oops, you don't define feature flag of UBLK_F_INTEGRITY, then how can userspace know UBLK INTEGRITY is supported by driver? With UBLK_F_INTEGRITY you can run early check in ublk_ctrl_add_dev() for: - dependency on user copy - if kernel enables CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY > > > > > Same for IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY). > > > > > + if (flags < 0) > > > + return flags; > > > + if (pi_tuple_size < 0) > > > + return pi_tuple_size; > > > + if (!p->metadata_size) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > blk_validate_integrity_limits() allows zero p->metadata_size with > > LBMD_PI_CSUM_NONE, maybe document ublk's support for zero metadata_size & > > LBMD_PI_CSUM_NONE? > > Sure, I can mention that UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_INTEGRITY requires a nonzero > metadata size. Would you prefer that metadata_size == 0 be supported? > It would be a bit more code, but certainly possible. It can be started with less feature/functions, and can be extended in future. Thanks, Ming
