Linux block layer
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	csander@purestorage.com,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7] blk-integrity: support arbitrary buffer alignment
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 14:45:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aZYy3L-UVjgNQS11@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251125185718.2190305-1-kbusch@meta.com>

On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 10:57:18AM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
> From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> 
> A bio segment may have partial interval block data with the rest
> continuing into the next segments because direct-io data payloads only
> need to align in memory to the device's DMA limits.
> 
> At the same time, the protection information may also be split in
> multiple segments. The most likely way that may happen is if two
> requests merge, or if we're directly using the io_uring user metadata.
> The generate/verify, however, only ever accessed the first bip_vec.
> 
> Further, it may be possible to unalign the protection fields from the
> user space buffer, or if there are odd additional opaque bytes in front
> or in back of the protection information metadata region.
> 
> Change up the iteration to allow spanning multiple segments. This patch
> is mostly a re-write of the protection information handling to allow any
> arbitrary alignments, so it's probably easier to review the end result
> rather than the diff.
> 
> Martin reports many SCSI controllers are not able to handle interval
> data composed of multiple segments when PI is used, so this patch
> introduces a new integrity limit that a low level driver can set to
> notify that it is capable of handling that, default to false. The nvme
> driver is the first one to enable it in this patch. Everyone else will
> force DMA alignment to the logical block size to ensure interval data is
> always aligned within a single segment.

Hi Jens,
It just came to my attention that this one is still outstanding. Any
thoughts about pulling this in? I may have to rebase it, but just want
to check before doing that.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-18 21:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-25 18:57 [PATCHv7] blk-integrity: support arbitrary buffer alignment Keith Busch
2026-02-18 21:45 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2026-02-22 16:29   ` Jens Axboe
2026-02-23 16:31     ` Keith Busch
2026-02-24 14:28       ` 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=aZYy3L-UVjgNQS11@kbusch-mbp \
    --to=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=csander@purestorage.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    /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