Re: [Possible REGRESSION, 4.16-rc4] Error updating SMART data during runtime and could not connect to lvmetad at some boot attempts

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 11-03-18 17:28, 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.
> 
> I think I can do that during the week with 4.16-rc5 then.

Great, thank you.

> Is it possible to override that setting at boot time with a kernel parameter?

Yes the Kconfig determines the default value for the ahci.mobile_lpm_policy
cmdline option, and that (setting the default val) is all it does, changing
that option has the same result as changing the Kconfig option and rebuilding.

 > It would make it easier to switch between the policies for testing.

Ack, as said the plan is to make CONFIG_SATA_MOBILE_LPM_POLICY=3 the default for
Fedora 28, so it is in my own interest to make it easy to test different
settings :)

Regards,

Hans