From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: Linlin Zhang <quic_linlzhan@quicinc.com>
Cc: virtio-dev@lists.linux.dev, quic_dshaikhu@quicinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] virtio-blk: Add inline encryption support
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 16:09:51 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260127210951.GA96301@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260127142032.2619551-1-quic_linlzhan@quicinc.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9512 bytes --]
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 10:20:32PM +0800, Linlin Zhang wrote:
> From: linlzhan <quic_linlzhan@quicinc.com>
>
> Inline encryption on virtio block can only be supported when
> the new feature bit VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE is negotiated.
>
> Extend struct virtio_blk_config and struct virtio_blk_req,
> so that crypto capabilities can be got in the frontend and
> encryption metadata can be sent to the backend, together with
> each I/O transaction.
This looks like a Self-Encrypting Drives feature along the lines of TCG
Opal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opal_Storage_Specification
Would it make sense to implement TCG Opal instead of defining a new
interface? That would make this more familiar to users and simplify
integration into existing tools like sedutil and cryptsetup (e.g. by
supporting the <linux/sed-opal.h> ioctl interface).
> Fixes: https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/238
>
> Change-Id: Ic23b2137e5d9a599d826e06c279f1b614d79abdf
> Signed-off-by: linlzhan <quic_linlzhan@quicinc.com>
> ---
> device-types/blk/description.tex | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/device-types/blk/description.tex b/device-types/blk/description.tex
> index 2712ada..23d8dc0 100644
> --- a/device-types/blk/description.tex
> +++ b/device-types/blk/description.tex
> @@ -66,6 +66,11 @@ \subsection{Feature bits}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Feature bits}
> (ZNS). For brevity, these standard documents are referred as "ZBD standards"
> from this point on in the text.
>
> +\item[VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE(22)] Inline Crypto Extensions are supported. When this
> + is negotiated, the device exposes crypto characteristics in configuration
> + space and the driver SHALL provide an extended request header containing a
SHALL, MUST, MAY, etc are only used in the normative sections of the
spec.
Why "SHALL"? Does this mean the device must be prepared to receive
requests without the payload field when VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE is negotiated?
How should the device behave in that case: fail the request or perform
I/O without crypto?
> + crypto payload for block I/O.
> +
> \end{description}
>
> \subsubsection{Legacy Interface: Feature bits}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Feature bits / Legacy Interface: Feature bits}
> @@ -128,6 +133,11 @@ \subsection{Device configuration layout}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device /
> u8 model;
> u8 unused2[3];
> } zoned;
> + struct virtio_blk_crypto_characteristics {
> + __virtio16 slot_info;
> + __virtio16 reserved;
> + __virtio32 capability;
> + } crypto;
> };
> \end{lstlisting}
>
> @@ -215,6 +225,25 @@ \subsection{Device configuration layout}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device /
> terminated by the device with a "zone resources exceeded" error as defined for
> specific commands later.
>
> +If the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE feature is negotiated, then in
> +\field{virtio_blk_crypto_characteristics},
> +\begin{itemize}
> +\item \field{slot_info} value packs two 8-bits values:
> + \begin{itemize}
> + \item Bits~\[15:8] (\emph{max\_slots}): the maximum number of supported
> + crypto key slots.
> + \item Bits~\[7:0] (\emph{slot\_offset}): an offset applied to slot numbering.
> + \end{itemize}
> +\item \field{capability} value packs four 8-bits values:
> + \begin{itemize}
> + \item Bits~\[31:24]: crypto algorithm id.
> + \item Bits~\[23:16]: mask of data unit size.
> + \item Bits~\[15:8]: crypto key size.
> + \item Bits~\[7:0]: unused.
> + \end{itemize}
Why are these fields packed? Configuration Space can have u8 fields.
These fields are not sufficiently documented. Where are the crypto
algorithm ids listed, etc?
How can a device support multiple algorithms? I think Configuration
Space may not be flexible enough for this. You could introduce a
GET_CRYPTO_INFO request type that allows the driver to fetch arrays of
crypto algorithm characteristics.
> +\end{itemize}
> +
> +
> \subsubsection{Legacy Interface: Device configuration layout}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device configuration layout / Legacy Interface: Device configuration layout}
> When using the legacy interface, transitional devices and drivers
> MUST format the fields in struct virtio_blk_config
> @@ -278,6 +307,10 @@ \subsection{Device Initialization}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Devic
> \field{zoned} can be read by the driver to determine the zone
> characteristics of the device. All \field{zoned} fields are read-only.
>
> +\item If the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE feature is negotiated, the fields in
> + \field{crypto} can be read by the driver to determine the inline crypto
> + characteristics of the device. All \field{crypto} fields are read-only.
> +
> \end{enumerate}
>
> \drivernormative{\subsubsection}{Device Initialization}{Device Types / Block Device / Device Initialization}
> @@ -317,6 +350,9 @@ \subsection{Device Initialization}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Devic
> driver SHOULD ignore all other fields in \field{zoned}.
> \end{itemize}
>
> +If the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE feature is negotiated, then the driver must validate
> + the max_slots in \field{slot_info} before the slot usage.
> +
> \devicenormative{\subsubsection}{Device Initialization}{Device Types / Block Device / Device Initialization}
>
> Devices SHOULD always offer VIRTIO_BLK_F_FLUSH, and MUST offer it
> @@ -402,6 +438,16 @@ \subsection{Device Initialization}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Devic
> \item the device MUST initialize padding bytes \field{unused2} to 0.
> \end{itemize}
>
> +If the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE feature is negotiated, then the fields in \field{cryto}
s/cryto/crypto/
> +struct in the configuration space MUST be set by the device.
> +\begin{itemize}
> +\item the \field{slot_info} field of \field{crypto} MUST be set by the device to a
> + max_slots in the higher 8 bits and slot_offset in the lower 8 bits.
> +
> +\item the \field{capability} field of \field{crypto} MUST be set by the device
> + to a crypto capability read from the storage register.
> +\end{itemize}
> +
> \subsubsection{Legacy Interface: Device Initialization}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Initialization / Legacy Interface: Device Initialization}
>
> Because legacy devices do not have FEATURES_OK, transitional devices
> @@ -436,6 +482,13 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Ope
> le32 type;
> le32 reserved;
> le64 sector;
> + struct virtio_blk_crypto_payload {
> + u8 slot;
> + u8 activate;
> + le16 reserved1;
> + le32 reserved2;
> + le64 data_unit_num;
> + } payload;
> u8 data[];
> u8 status;
> };
> @@ -463,6 +516,20 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Ope
> the read or write is to occur. This field is unused and set to 0 for
> commands other than read, write and some zone operations.
>
> +The \field{payload} consists of the encryption information for current
> +request. It need to be set by the driver only when the feature VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE
> +is negotiated.
"set" is ambiguous: does it meaning filling in the fields or does it
mean the fields are only present when VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE is negotiated
(this distinction is important if other features add more fields after
payload in the future).
The sentence could be reworded:
It is only present when the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE feature is negotiated and
\field{type} is VIRTIO_BLK_T_IN or VIRTIO_BLK_T_OUT.
(I'm not sure whether DISCARD, WRITE_ZEROES, or SECURE_ERASE also need
the payload field. It seems like GET_ID and GET_LIFETIME do not need the
payload field.)
> +\begin{itemize}
> +\item The \field{slot} filed in \field{payload} indicates the ICE
s/filed/field/
> + (Inline Crypto Encryption) slot index where the key resides in.
s/where the key resides in/where the key resides/
> +
> +\item The \field{activate} filed in \field{payload} implies this is a
s/filed/field/
> + encryption request.
Does "encryption" really mean just encryption or does it mean
encryption for writes and decryption for reads?
> +
> +\item The \field{data_unit_num} filed in \field{payload} indicates the
s/filed/field/
> + starting block of the request.
> +\end{itemize}
> +
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_IN requests populate \field{data} with the contents of sectors
> read from the block device (in multiples of 512 bytes). VIRTIO_BLK_T_OUT
> requests write the contents of \field{data} to the block device (in multiples
> @@ -912,6 +979,8 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Ope
> successfully, failed, or were processed by the device at all if the request
> failed with VIRTIO_BLK_S_IOERR.
>
> +A driver MUST set \field{activate} to 0 for a non VIRTIO_BLK_F_ICE request.
Please explicitly list request types where the payload field is present
and where activate is optional.
> +
> The following requirements only apply if the VIRTIO_BLK_F_ZONED feature is
> negotiated.
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-27 21:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-27 14:14 [PATCH v1] virtio-blk: Add inline encryption support Linlin Zhang
2026-01-27 14:20 ` Linlin Zhang
2026-01-27 21:09 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2026-01-30 10:23 ` Linlin Zhang
2026-02-02 15:56 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2026-02-03 10:06 ` Linlin Zhang
2026-02-03 14:43 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2026-02-04 13:57 ` Linlin Zhang
2026-02-04 17:27 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2026-02-06 17:12 ` [PATCH v2] " Linlin Zhang
2026-02-19 14:35 ` Sebastian Mauritsson
2026-02-22 6:09 ` Linlin Zhang
2026-02-26 11:08 ` Sebastian Mauritsson
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=20260127210951.GA96301@fedora \
--to=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=quic_dshaikhu@quicinc.com \
--cc=quic_linlzhan@quicinc.com \
--cc=virtio-dev@lists.linux.dev \
/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