On 12/5/22 9:20 AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote: > Implement the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME feature for VirtIO block devices. > > This commit introduces a new ioctl command, VBLK_LIFETIME. > > VBLK_LIFETIME ioctl asks for the block device to provide lifetime > information by sending a VIRTIO_BLK_T_GET_LIFETIME command to the device. > > lifetime information fields: > > - pre_eol_info: specifies the percentage of reserved blocks that are > consumed. > optional values following virtio spec: > *) 0 - undefined. > *) 1 - normal, < 80% of reserved blocks are consumed. > *) 2 - warning, 80% of reserved blocks are consumed. > *) 3 - urgent, 90% of reserved blocks are consumed. > > - device_lifetime_est_typ_a: this field refers to wear of SLC cells and > is provided in increments of 10used, and so > on, thru to 11 meaning estimated lifetime > exceeded. All values above 11 are reserved. > > - device_lifetime_est_typ_b: this field refers to wear of MLC cells and is > provided with the same semantics as > device_lifetime_est_typ_a. > > The data received from the device will be sent as is to the user. > No data check/decode is done by virtblk. Is this based on some spec? Because it looks pretty odd to me. There can be a pretty wide range of two/three/etc level cells with wildly different ranges of durability. And there's really not a lot of slc for generic devices these days, if any. -- Jens Axboe
