[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220610120554.ry7w37jbf3g6w3p3@quentin>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 14:05:54 +0200
From: Pankaj Raghav <pankydev8@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
"R, Monish Kumar" <monish.kumar.r@...el.com>,
"open list:NVM EXPRESS DRIVER" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"alan.adamson@...cle.com" <alan.adamson@...cle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@...hat.com>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, "axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>,
"Rao, Abhijeet" <abhijeet.rao@...el.com>,
Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>,
Javier González <javier.gonz@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: 2 second nvme initialization delay regression in 5.18 [Was: Re:
[bug report]nvme0: Admin Cmd(0x6), I/O Error (sct 0x0 / sc 0x2) MORE DNR
observed during blktests]
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 08:14:49AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The 970 seems to actually be very slightly newer than the X5. What
> I suspect is that they actually are the same m.2 SSD or at least a
> very similar one and Samsung decided to ship it in the thunderbolt
> attached versions first. Maybe one of the Samsung folks here can
> confirm.
>
> That leaves us with two plausible theories:
>
> - the problems could be due to an earlier firmware version or
> ASIC stepping
> - the problems are due to the thunderbolt attachment
>
I have forwarded this report internally within Samsung and I will post an
update once I have more information about this issue.
Cheers,
Pankaj
Powered by blists - more mailing lists