cephfs: add SetSubVolCSIMetadata to set CSI metadata on subvolumes by iPraveenParihar · Pull Request #6174 · ceph/ceph-csi

iPraveenParihar · 2026-03-10T07:07:54Z

Describe what this PR does

Add support for setting CSI metadata (PV/PVC info) on CephFS subvolumes. The PV controller now distinguishes between CephFS and RBD PVs and dispatches accordingly.

Future concerns

List items that are not part of the PR and do not impact it's
functionality, but are work items that can be taken up subsequently.

Checklist:

Commit Message Formatting: Commit titles and messages follow guidelines in the developer guide.
Reviewed the developer guide on Submitting a Pull Request
Pending release notes updated with breaking and/or notable changes for the next major release.
Documentation has been updated, if necessary.
Unit tests have been added, if necessary.
Integration tests have been added, if necessary.

Show available bot commands

These commands are normally not required, but in case of issues, leave any of
the following bot commands in an otherwise empty comment in this PR:

/retest ci/centos/<job-name>: retest the <job-name> after unrelated
failure (please report the failure too!)

nixpanic · 2026-03-17T12:38:58Z

internal/controller/persistentvolume/persistentvolume.go

+	// CephFS PVs always have "fsName" in their volume attributes (required
+	// StorageClass parameter), while RBD PVs do not.
+	_, isCephFS := pv.Spec.CSI.VolumeAttributes["fsName"]
+	if isCephFS {


Instead of doing a if-return-action and standard-action, put the difference in handling in a switch/case. This makes the code easier to read and better maintainable.

With this approach, it is not clear if there should be a rbdVolID != volumeHandler check for CephFS too. Possibly it was missed as it is done at the end of the function.

For CephFS, we are only setting the CSI metadata and no new volumeID is generated to compare. rbdVolID != volumeHandler is only for RBD PVC.

Yes, I understand that, but we try to keep this generic flow in functions:

validate parameters, return on error

do something, return on error

do something else, return on error

final things

return success

The point is, that the if isCephFS { section returns from the function on success. This isn't structured well, as CephFS/RBD are handled both in this function, but not equally (for the lack of better phrasing).

To keep the understandable and clear readable structure above, it is better to handle the differences between CephFS/RBD in a switch (or if/else if you prefer that).

My 1st impression was that the handling for CephFS/RBD should be done in their own functions. But because it is a single call for CephFS, and only two actions for RBD, placing them inside a switch statement is clean enough.

With only two cases, I'll prefer if/else directly.

Rakshith-R · 2026-03-23T11:47:41Z

internal/controller/persistentvolume/persistentvolume.go

+	// Determine PV type from volume attributes and dispatch accordingly.
+	// CephFS PVs always have "fsName" in their volume attributes (required
+	// StorageClass parameter), while RBD PVs do not.
+	_, isCephFS := pv.Spec.CSI.VolumeAttributes["fsName"]
+	if isCephFS {


use type cmdline flag as used with cephcsi cmd

with default as rbd

ceph-csi/cmd/cephcsi.go

Line 64 in 46123d6

flag.StringVar(&conf.Vtype, "type", "", "driver type [rbd|cephfs|nfs|nvmeof|liveness|controller]")

ceph-csi/cmd/cephcsi.go

Lines 174 to 179 in 46123d6

// select driver name based on volume type

switch conf.Vtype {

case util.RBDType:

return rbdDefaultName

case util.CephFsType:

return cephFSDefaultName

@Rakshith-R we already pass type=controller for the omap sidecars.

nixpanic · 2026-03-24T15:56:55Z

Can be rebased and ok-to-test'd once #6197 is merged.

iPraveenParihar · 2026-03-25T07:46:54Z

@Mergifyio rebase

Add support for setting CSI metadata (PV/PVC info) on CephFS subvolumes. The PV controller now distinguishes between CephFS and RBD PVs and dispatches accordingly. Signed-off-by: Praveen M <m.praveen@ibm.com>

mergify · 2026-03-25T07:47:08Z

rebase

✅ Branch has been successfully rebased

iPraveenParihar · 2026-03-25T08:24:39Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.35

iPraveenParihar · 2026-03-25T08:24:43Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.35

iPraveenParihar · 2026-03-25T10:54:35Z

/retest ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.35

nixpanic · 2026-03-25T13:59:15Z

@Mergifyio rebase

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:32Z

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.33

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:32Z

/test ci/centos/upgrade-tests-cephfs

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:32Z

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.35

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.34

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.33

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/upgrade-tests-rbd

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.34

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.35

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:33Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.33

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:34Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.34

ceph-csi-bot · 2026-03-25T13:59:34Z

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.35

mergify · 2026-03-25T13:59:36Z

rebase

☑️ Nothing to do, the required conditions are not met

Details

any of:
- #commits-behind > 0 [📌 rebase requirement]
- -linear-history [📌 rebase requirement]
-closed [📌 rebase requirement]
-conflict [📌 rebase requirement]
queue-position = -1 [📌 rebase requirement]

mergify · 2026-03-25T16:52:59Z

Merge Queue Status

✅ Entered queue — 2026-03-25 16:52 UTC · Rule: default
✅ Checks skipped · PR is already up-to-date
✅ Merged — 2026-03-25 16:52 UTC · at 196d60a6c307ae12bcf7d06bf273aaab7900bbdc

This pull request spent 5 seconds in the queue, with no time running CI.

Required conditions to merge

#approved-reviews-by >= 2 [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
- cephfs: add SetSubVolCSIMetadata to set CSI metadata on subvolumes #6174
#changes-requested-reviews-by = 0 [🛡 GitHub branch protection]
- cephfs: add SetSubVolCSIMetadata to set CSI metadata on subvolumes #6174

mergify bot added the component/cephfs Issues related to CephFS label Mar 10, 2026

iPraveenParihar force-pushed the cephfs/backfill-csi-metadata branch from 4c9d310 to e7fb4f3 Compare March 11, 2026 04:27

iPraveenParihar marked this pull request as ready for review March 11, 2026 11:34

nixpanic reviewed Mar 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

iPraveenParihar requested review from Madhu-1 and nixpanic March 18, 2026 10:40

iPraveenParihar force-pushed the cephfs/backfill-csi-metadata branch from 82cc455 to ab3b7d6 Compare March 23, 2026 05:58

Rakshith-R reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Rakshith-R approved these changes Mar 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

nixpanic approved these changes Mar 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Madhu-1 approved these changes Mar 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

cephfs: add SetSubVolCSIMetadata to set CSI metadata on subvolumes

196d60a

Add support for setting CSI metadata (PV/PVC info) on CephFS subvolumes. The PV controller now distinguishes between CephFS and RBD PVs and dispatches accordingly. Signed-off-by: Praveen M <m.praveen@ibm.com>

ceph-csi-bot force-pushed the cephfs/backfill-csi-metadata branch from ab3b7d6 to 196d60a Compare March 25, 2026 07:47

nixpanic added the ok-to-test Label to trigger E2E tests label Mar 25, 2026

nixpanic removed the ok-to-test Label to trigger E2E tests label Mar 25, 2026

mergify bot merged commit 9ca3fa1 into ceph:devel Mar 25, 2026
36 of 37 checks passed

iPraveenParihar mentioned this pull request Mar 27, 2026

cephfs: add controller sidecar for setting CSI metadata on subvolumes ceph/ceph-csi-operator#446

Merged

6 tasks

	// select driver name based on volume type
	switch conf.Vtype {
	case util.RBDType:
	return rbdDefaultName
	case util.CephFsType:
	return cephFSDefaultName

Conversation

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Describe what this PR does

Future concerns

Uh oh!

nixpanic Mar 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar Mar 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nixpanic Mar 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar Mar 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Rakshith-R Mar 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar Mar 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nixpanic commented Mar 24, 2026

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

mergify bot commented Mar 25, 2026

✅ Branch has been successfully rebased

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

nixpanic commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ceph-csi-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

mergify bot commented Mar 25, 2026

☑️ Nothing to do, the required conditions are not met

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mergify bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Merge Queue Status

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

iPraveenParihar commented Mar 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

nixpanic Mar 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading