lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 5 Jul 2020 19:19:29 -0300
From:   Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <>
To:     Ming Lei <>
Cc:     Damien Le Moal <>,
        Simon Arlott <>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <>,
        Jonathan Corbet <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: sd: stop SSD (non-rotational) disks before reboot

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:01 AM Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> <> wrote:
> > Cache flushes do not matter that much when SSDs and sudden power cuts
> > are involved.  Power cuts at the wrong time harm the FLASH itself, it is
> > not about still-in-flight data.
> >
> > Keep in mind that SSDs do a _lot_ of background writing, and power cuts
> What is the __lot__ of SSD's BG writing? GC?

GC, and scrubbing.

> > during a FLASH write or erase can cause from weakened cells, to much
> > larger damage.  It is possible to harden the chip or the design against
> > this, but it is *expensive*.  And even if warded off by hardening and no
> > FLASH damage happens, an erase/program cycle must be done on the whole
> > erase block to clean up the incomplete program cycle.
> It should have been SSD's(including FW) responsibility to avoid data loss when
> the SSD is doing its own BG writing, because power cut can happen any time
> from SSD's viewpoint.

Oh, I fully agree.  And yet, we had devices from several large vendors
complaining about unclean shutdowns.  So, "it should have been", as
usual, amounts to very little in the end.

> > When you do not follow these rules, well, excellent datacenter-class
> > SSDs have super-capacitor power banks that actually work.  Most SSDs do
> > not, although they hopefully came a long way and hopefully modern SSDs
> > are not as easily to brick as they were reported to be three or four
> > years ago.
> I remember that DC SSDs often don't support BG GC.

And have proper supercap local power banks, etc.  I'd say they're not
really relevant to this thread.

  Henrique Holschuh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists