From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@samsung.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, martin.petersen@oracle.com,
sagi@grimberg.me, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com,
Chinmay Gameti <c.gameti@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] block: support PI at non-zero offset within metadata
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 17:07:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZvV4uCUXp9_4x5ct@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240201130126.211402-3-joshi.k@samsung.com>
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 06:31:25PM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
> Block layer integrity processing assumes that protection information
> (PI) is placed in the first bytes of each metadata block.
>
> Remove this limitation and include the metadata before the PI in the
> calculation of the guard tag.
Very late reply, but I am just now discovering the consequences of this
patch.
We have drives with this format, 64b metadata with PI at the end. With
previous kernels, we had written data to these drives. Those kernel
versions disabled the GUARD generation, so the metadata was written
without it, and everything was fine.
Now we upgrade to 6.9+, and this kernel enables the GUARD check. All the
data previously written to this drive is unreadable because the GUARD is
invalid.
Not sure exactly what to do about this, but it is a broken kernel
upgrade path, so wanted to throw that information out there.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-26 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20240201130828epcas5p10bd98bcb6b8e9444603e347c2a910c44@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2024-02-01 13:01 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Block integrity with flexible-offset PI Kanchan Joshi
2024-02-01 13:01 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] block: refactor guard helpers Kanchan Joshi
2024-02-01 13:01 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] block: support PI at non-zero offset within metadata Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-26 15:07 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2024-09-26 16:38 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-26 16:55 ` Keith Busch
2024-09-27 16:07 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-30 17:57 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-10-01 7:27 ` Javier González
2024-10-01 15:37 ` Keith Busch
2024-10-02 10:29 ` Javier González
2024-10-02 16:18 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-10-02 19:03 ` Keith Busch
2024-02-01 13:01 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] nvme: allow integrity when PI is not in first bytes Kanchan Joshi
2024-02-12 15:47 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Block integrity with flexible-offset PI Kanchan Joshi
2024-02-12 15:57 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZvV4uCUXp9_4x5ct@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=c.gameti@samsung.com \
--cc=gost.dev@samsung.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=joshi.k@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox