On Fri, Jul 18, 2025, at 01:37, Klara Modin wrote: >> diff --git a/block/ioctl.c b/block/ioctl.c >> index 9ad403733e19..af2e22e5533c 100644 >> --- a/block/ioctl.c >> +++ b/block/ioctl.c >> @@ -566,9 +566,11 @@ static int blkdev_common_ioctl(struct block_device *bdev, blk_mode_t mode, >> void __user *argp) >> { >> unsigned int max_sectors; >> + int ret; >> >> - if (_IOC_NR(cmd) == _IOC_NR(FS_IOC_GETLBMD_CAP)) >> - return blk_get_meta_cap(bdev, cmd, argp); > >> + ret = blk_get_meta_cap(bdev, cmd, argp); >> + if (ret != -ENOIOCTLCMD) >> + return ret; > > This check seems to be incomplete. In the case when BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY is > disabled the ioctl can never complete as blk_get_meta_cap will then > always return -EOPNOTSUPP. Or should the !BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY stub be > changed to return -ENOIOCTLCMD instead? Ah, I did miss the stub. > It makes e.g. cryptsetup fail in my initramfs. Adding -EOPNOTSUPP to the > check fixes it for me: > > diff --git a/block/ioctl.c b/block/ioctl.c > index af2e22e5533c..7d5361fd1b7d 100644 > --- a/block/ioctl.c > +++ b/block/ioctl.c > @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static int blkdev_common_ioctl(struct block_device > *bdev, blk_mode_t mode, > int ret; > > ret = blk_get_meta_cap(bdev, cmd, argp); > - if (ret != -ENOIOCTLCMD) > + if (ret != -EOPNOTSUPP && ret != -ENOIOCTLCMD) > return ret; > > switch (cmd) { I think returning -ENOIOCTLCMD from the stub makes more sense, but I don't know what the motivation for the -EOPNOTSUPP was. Arnd