- To: Michael Tokarev <mjt@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] libata: enable SATA disk fua detection on default
- From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:06:04 +0800
- Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <4FF3E478.50609@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
- List-id: <linux-ide.vger.kernel.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Michael Tokarev <mjt@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@xxxxxxxxxx>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 10:36:40AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply. Indeed it is quite a big project but we enable
> > FUA feature for SAS disk. Is there any differences?
>
> Yes, there's a very big difference with SAS disks. Even in parallel SCSI
> world DPO/FUA has been enabled since the day it has been implemented IIRC,
> because, apparently, hardware raid controllers enabled it too. In other
> words, it has been tested and proved to be working even before linux
> implementation. When first SAS disks started appearing, DPO/FUA were
> enabled for them in linux already -- at that time any breakage were
> solely due to the particular disk model, and were easy to blacklist,
> if necessary, since only a few disk models were in production.
>
> With SATA disks, initial hardware implementation proved to be more
> non-functional than functional, ie, initially there were more drives
> with non-working FUA. I have a few not-so-old SATA drives here which
> behaves strangely when FUA is enabled (I don't remember exact details,
> but I had to disable FA again after I tried to enable it once, the
> system started behaving not as good as before). So, for SATA drives,
> we've exactly the opposite picture: we've some proof that "generally,
> drives dislikes FUA", and now when fua has been disabled for a lot
> of drives and users, turning it on by default needs lots of testing.
>
> But I ask again: what is the benefit of turning FUA on to start with?
Thanks for your clarification. :-)
Turning FUA on can reduce the overhead of flushes AFAIK. In our product
system we have a lot of SATA disks with FUA, but we must add a boot
parameter 'libata.fua=1' to enable it. Meanwhile there already has a
number of SATA disks that have supported this feature. So I think maybe
we can enable it.
Regards,
Zheng
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Linux Filesystems]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux RAID]
[Git]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Linux Newbie]
[Share Photos]
[Security]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Yosemite]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Samba]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Device Mapper]
[Linux Resources]