Hans de Goede - 14.03.18, 12:05: > Hi, > > On 14-03-18 12:01, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Hans de Goede - 11.03.18, 15:37: > >> Hi Martin, > >> > >> On 11-03-18 09:20, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > >>> Hello. > >>> > >>> Since 4.16-rc4 (upgraded from 4.15.2 which worked) I have an issue > >>> with SMART checks occassionally failing like this: > >>> > >>> smartd[28017]: Device: /dev/sdb [SAT], is in SLEEP mode, suspending > >>> checks > >>> udisksd[24408]: Error performing housekeeping for drive > >>> /org/freedesktop/UDisks2/drives/INTEL_SSDSA2CW300G3_[…]: Error updating > >>> SMART data: Error sending ATA command CHECK POWER MODE: Unexpected sense > >>> data returned:#0120000: 0e 09 0c 00 00 00 ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 50 > >>> 00 ..............P.#0120010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > >>> 00 > >>> 00 00 00 ................#012 (g-io-error-quark, 0) merkaba > >>> udisksd[24408]: Error performing housekeeping for drive > >>> /org/freedesktop/UDisks2/drives/Crucial_CT480M500SSD3_[…]: Error > >>> updating > >>> SMART dat a: Error sending ATA command CHECK POWER MODE: Unexpected > >>> sense > >>> data returned:#0120000: 01 00 1d 00 00 00 0e 09 0c 00 00 00 ff 00 00 > >>> 00 ................#0120010: 00 0 0 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > >>> 00 00 00 00 ....P...........#012 (g-io-error-quark, 0) > >>> > >>> (Intel SSD is connected via SATA, Crucial via mSATA in a ThinkPad T520) > >>> > >>> However when I then check manually with smartctl -a | -x | -H the device > >>> reports SMART data just fine. > >>> > >>> As smartd correctly detects that device is in sleep mode, this may be an > >>> userspace issue in udisksd. > >>> > >>> Also at some boot attempts the boot hangs with a message like "could not > >>> connect to lvmetad, scanning manually for devices". I use BTRFS RAID 1 > >>> on to LVs (each on one of the SSDs). A configuration that requires a > >>> manual > >>> adaption to InitRAMFS in order to boot (basically vgchange -ay before > >>> btrfs device scan). > >>> > >>> I wonder whether that has to do with the new SATA LPM policy stuff, but > >>> as > >>> I had issues with > >>> > >>> 3 => Medium power with Device Initiated PM enabled > >>> > >>> (machine did not boot, which could also have been caused by me > >>> accidentally > >>> removing all TCP/IP network support in the kernel with that setting) > >>> > >>> I set it back to > >>> > >>> CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=0 > >>> > >>> (firmware settings) > >> > >> Right, so at that settings the LPM policy changes are effectively > >> disabled and cannot explain your SMART issues. > >> > >> Still I would like to zoom in on this part of your bug report, because > >> for Fedora 28 we are planning to ship with > >> CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 > >> and AFAIK Ubuntu has similar plans. > >> > >> I suspect that the issue you were seeing with > >> CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 were with the Crucial disk ? I've > >> attached > >> a patch for you to test, which disabled LPM for your model Crucial SSD > >> (but > >> keeps it on for the Intel disk) if you can confirm that with that patch > >> you > >> can run with > >> CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 without issues that would be great. > > > > With 4.16-rc5 with CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 the system successfully > > booted three times in a row. So feel free to add tested-by. > > Thanks. > > To be clear, you're talking about 4.16-rc5 with the patch I made to > blacklist the Crucial disk I assume, not just plain 4.16-rc5, right ?
4.16-rc5 with your 0001-libata-Apply-NOLPM-quirk-to-Crucial-M500-480GB-SSDs.patch patch. Thanks, -- Martin
