On 24/08/09 08:42PM, Christian Heusel wrote: > On 24/08/09 08:34AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > On 2024/08/07 15:10, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 11:26:46AM -0700, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > >> On 2024/08/07 10:23, Christian Heusel wrote: > > >>> Hello Igor, hello Niklas, > > >>> > > >>> on my NAS I am encountering the following issue since v6.6.44 (LTS), > > >>> when executing the hdparm command for my WD-WCC7K4NLX884 drives to get > > >>> the active or standby state: > > >>> > > >>> $ hdparm -C /dev/sda > > >>> /dev/sda: > > >>> SG_IO: bad/missing sense data, sb[]: f0 00 01 00 50 40 ff 0a 00 00 78 00 00 1d 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > > >>> drive state is: unknown > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> While the expected output is the following: > > >>> > > >>> $ hdparm -C /dev/sda > > >>> /dev/sda: > > >>> drive state is: active/idle > > >>> > > > > Yes, indeed. I do not want to revert any of these recent patches, because as you > > rightly summarize here, these fix something that has been broken for a long > > time. We were just lucky that we did not see more application failures until > > now, or rather unlucky that we did not as that would have revealed these > > problems earlier. > > > > So I think we will have some patching to do to hdparm at least to fix the > > problems there. > > It seems like this does not only break hdparm but also hddtemp, which > does not use hdparm as dep as far as I can tell: > > # on bad kernel for the above issue > $ hddtemp /dev/sda > /dev/sda: WDC WD40EFRX-68N32N0 : drive is sleeping > > # on good kernel for the above issue > $ hddtemp /dev/sda > /dev/sda: WDC WD40EFRX-68N32N0: 31°C > > I didn't take the time to actually verify that this is the same issue, > but it seems very likely from what we have gathered in this thread > already. > > So while I agree that it might have previously just worked by chance it > seems like there is quite some stuff depending on the previous behavior. > > This was first discovered in [this thread in the Arch Linux Forums][0] > by user @GerBra. > > ~Chris > > [0]: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=298407 As someone on the same thread has pointed out, this also seems to affect udiskd: https://github.com/storaged-project/udisks/issues/732
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
