[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1494258011.5407.18.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 16:40:11 +0100
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Ricard Wanderlof <ricard.wanderlof@...s.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Subject: Re: Race to power off harming SATA SSDs
On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 13:50 +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Mon, 08 May 2017 11:13:10 +0100
> David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 11:09 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > >
> > > You're forgetting that the SSD itself (this thread is about SSDs) also has
> > > a major software component which is doing housekeeping all the time, so even
> > > if the main CPU gets reset the SSD's controller may still happily be erasing
> > > blocks.
> > We're not really talking about SSDs at all any more; we're talking
> > about real flash with real maintainable software.
>
> It's probably a good sign that this new discussion should take place in
> a different thread :-).
Well, maybe. But it was a silly thread in the first place. SATA SSDs
aren't *expected* to be reliable.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (4938 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists