Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SATA ALPM] ssd hard drive error due to file system remount in read only #84

Closed
pvanhauw opened this issue Jul 29, 2014 · 41 comments
Closed

Comments

@pvanhauw
Copy link

I use linux mint 17 qiana 64bits with cinnamon. I installed a new ssd: the MX100 crucial 512 on a Samsung Ativ book 8 (Np870)

After sometime, but this also ALWAYS happens if the laptop stays idle and the screen is disactivated, the file system is remounted in read only because of an error.

You can find all the information here: http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=174315

The most important part is the dmesg:

1982.874590] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x40000 action 0x6 frozen
[ 1982.874595] ata5: SError: { CommWake }
[ 1982.874598] ata5.00: failed command: FLUSH CACHE EXT
[ 1982.874602] ata5.00: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0
[ 1982.874602] res 40/00:00:00:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout)
[ 1982.874604] ata5.00: status: { DRDY }
[ 1982.874607] ata5: hard resetting link
[ 1988.238907] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
[ 1992.890664] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
[ 1992.890670] ata5: hard resetting link
[ 1998.254987] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
[ 2002.906743] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
[ 2002.906750] ata5: hard resetting link
[ 2008.271052] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
[ 2037.975036] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
[ 2037.975042] ata5: limiting SATA link speed to 3.0 Gbps
[ 2037.975044] ata5: hard resetting link
[ 2043.003094] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
[ 2043.003101] ata5: reset failed, giving up
[ 2043.003103] ata5.00: disabled
[ 2043.003105] ata5.00: device reported invalid CHS sector 0
[ 2043.003114] ata5: EH complete
[ 2043.003151] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda] Unhandled error code
[ 2043.003153] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda]
[ 2043.003154] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda] Unhandled error code
[ 2043.003156] Result: hostbyte=DID_BAD_TARGET driverbyte=DRIVER_OK
[ 2043.003158] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda] CDB:
[ 2043.003163] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda]
[ 2043.003163] Result: hostbyte=DID_BAD_TARGET driverbyte=DRIVER_OK
[ 2043.003165] sd 4:0:0:0: [sda] CDB:
[ 2043.003159] Write(10): 2a 00
[ 2043.003166] Write(10): 2a 00 0e a9 70 c8 00 00 08 00
[ 2043.003176] end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 245985480
[ 2043.003179] EXT4-fs warning (device sda8): ext4_end_bio:317: I/O error writing to inode 916782 (offset 0 size 4096 starting block 30748186)
[ 2043.003183] Buffer I/O error on device sda8, logical block 3761689
[ 2043.003180] 0f 22 6f e0 00 00 08 00

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

Hi,

some devices don't work reliably with ALPM. Try

SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=max_performance

or

SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=medium_power

@ConvMe
Copy link

ConvMe commented Aug 13, 2014

Can confirm this issue on an Acer Aspire V5-573G. Linux Mint 17 Qiana 64 with cinnamon desktop and Crucial MX100 512GB. On battery i get the I/O error.

Changing "SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT" solved this problem for me. "medium_power" was good enough.

Thanks

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

@pvanhauw: did my suggested workaround help?

@lupinix
Copy link

lupinix commented Sep 9, 2014

Had the same issue with ThinkPad R400 and MX100 512GB, SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=max_performance solved the problem

@falense
Copy link

falense commented Sep 12, 2014

@linrunner I can tentatively confirm that your workaround helps. I had the same issues (Asus UX32LN + MX100 512GB + Linux Mint 17) and have been trying to reproduce the error for the past 3 days. So far no crashes. For me the crashes were seemingly random and somewhat far apart, I will report back in another couple of days.

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

@Sondree: which of the two suggested values?

@falense
Copy link

falense commented Sep 12, 2014

@linrunner SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=medium_power

@halocaridina
Copy link

FYI for others running across this issue:

An upstream report can be found at: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72191

Please note Comment #23; specifically, the "medium_power" workaround for laptop models such as the Lenovo T440S appears to be SSD model sensitive/specific. So be sure to carefully track your journal/logs if using an ALPM setting besides "max-performance".

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

Hi guys,

could you post some more dmesg snippets so i can design a regexp for this?

I'm considering to add a warning to tlp-stat output.

@halocaridina
Copy link

Just searched my journal and no longer have any of the past errors available for posting (and rather not force the issue by inducing them). However, they were similar/identical to those under the initial post here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/539467

linrunner added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 14, 2014
          SATA_LINKPWR_ON_AC/BAT != max_performance (Issue #84).
@linrunner linrunner added this to the 0.6 Release milestone Sep 14, 2014
@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

I have implemented a check for the above errors in tlp-stat – sample output:

+++ Warnings
* Kernel log shows ata errors (2) possibly caused by the configuration: SATA_LINKPWR_ON_AC/BAT=min/medium_power
  --> Consider using medium_power or max_performance instead!
  --> Check yourself with:
      dmesg | egrep -A 5 "ata[0-9]+: SError: { .*CommWake }"

@pvanhauw
Copy link
Author

Yep, I confirm

SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=max_performance

worked. I have not done extensive testing with the medium option yet.

Pierre

2014-09-03 19:14 GMT+02:00 linrunner notifications@github.com:

@pvanhauw https://github.com/pvanhauw: did my suggested workaround help?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#84 (comment).

@falense
Copy link

falense commented Sep 21, 2014

@linrunner @pvanhauw I have been using medium_power on my setup for the past 2 weeks. No errors related to this so far, seems all good :)

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

Check released with 0.6.

@linrunner linrunner self-assigned this Oct 19, 2014
@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

I leave this open. More reports are welcome.

@saschalalala
Copy link

Thinkpad L420, Fedora 22, same problem with a Crucial MX100, set in on max_power and it works.

@sdh4
Copy link

sdh4 commented Jun 3, 2015

Thinkpad Yoga, Fedora 22, same problem with a Crucial MX100, set in on max_power and it works.

I also note a number of comments on the Crucial support forums mentioning system stability or slowdowns under Windows until SATA link power management is disabled.

I plan on commenting on this kernel bug: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
and suggesting a blacklist entry the SATA link power management for the MX100.

vloup pushed a commit to vloup/archlinux-lenovo-t430 that referenced this issue Jul 22, 2015
…power

It seems common with the same SSD model (Crucial MX100 512Go) since it has been
reported on linrunner/TLP#84, thanks linrunner for
the fix.
@dezull
Copy link

dezull commented Oct 11, 2015

On Thinkpad T450 with MX100 crucial 512 SSD, with SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=min_power, if I put the laptop on sleep first before unplugging power source, it will work normally after that.

@UrsMetz
Copy link

UrsMetz commented Nov 8, 2015

I'm running Debian Jessie on a Thinkpad T440s with an ordinary HDD (i.e. no SSD). When switching to SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=medium_power I get the following in dmes --human:

[Nov 8 11:47] ata1.00: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x6000000 SErr 0x50000 action 0xe frozen
[  +0,000005] ata1.00: irq_stat 0x00400000, PHY RDY changed
[  +0,000002] ata1: SError: { PHYRdyChg CommWake }
[  +0,000003] ata1.00: failed command: WRITE FPDMA QUEUED
[  +0,000004] ata1.00: cmd 61/08:c8:38:09:44/00:00:15:00:00/40 tag 25 ncq 4096 out
         res 50/00:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error)
[  +0,000002] ata1.00: status: { DRDY }
[  +0,000002] ata1.00: failed command: WRITE FPDMA QUEUED
[  +0,000004] ata1.00: cmd 61/08:d0:28:0b:91/00:00:15:00:00/40 tag 26 ncq 4096 out
         res 50/00:03:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error)
[  +0,000001] ata1.00: status: { DRDY }

When using SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=max_performance the error messages disappear. Currently tlp-stat does not issue a warning (I'm using TLP from http://repo.linrunner.de/debian, I guess it is version 0.8). So I'm providing my dmes output as requested by @linrunner :-).

@UrsMetz
Copy link

UrsMetz commented Nov 8, 2015

I just found out you have to activate warnings (tlp-stat -w) in order to see the message. So the check also works on my machine, please ignore my previous comment.

@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

Hi Urs, nevertheless thanks for your report.

Since 0.8 [1] tlp-stat without parameters and tlp-stat -d should both produce the warnings section at the end of the output. I'd appreciate if you could retest this.

[1] https://github.com/linrunner/TLP/blob/master/tlp-stat.in#L1103

@UrsMetz
Copy link

UrsMetz commented Nov 8, 2015

@linrunner I've just retested it: both tlp-stat without parameters and tlp-stat -d issue the warning as expected.
I could be that when I checked this morning I had already switched back to SATA_LINKPWR_ON_BAT=max_performance.

followmsi pushed a commit to followmsi/android_kernel_samsung_exynos7870 that referenced this issue Mar 25, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
svoboda18 pushed a commit to svoboda18/android_blackghost_kernel that referenced this issue Mar 30, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
curtisy1 pushed a commit to curtisy1/android_kernel_nubia_nx606j that referenced this issue Mar 30, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
zachariasmaladroit pushed a commit to zachariasmaladroit/kernel_lge_msm8998 that referenced this issue Apr 14, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
curtisy1 pushed a commit to curtisy1/android_kernel_nubia_nx606j that referenced this issue Jun 7, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Srijith2001 pushed a commit to Srijith2001/android_kernel_oppo_RMX1801 that referenced this issue Jun 19, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
TheNotOnly pushed a commit to TheNotOnly/android_kernel_lge_sdm845-archived that referenced this issue Jun 24, 2019
commit 9c7be59 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
ananjaser1211 pushed a commit to ananjaser1211/Helios_7870 that referenced this issue Jun 29, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
vishalk17 pushed a commit to vishalk17/motorola_android_kernel_mtk that referenced this issue Jul 4, 2019
commit 9c7be59 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Mohi1117 pushed a commit to Mohi1117/android_kernel_samsung_exynos7870 that referenced this issue Jul 23, 2019
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
@linrunner
Copy link
Owner

All kernels should be patched by now.

rudcode pushed a commit to rudcode/android_kernel_sony_msm8996 that referenced this issue Mar 29, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
RebelLion420 pushed a commit to RebelLion420/kernel_perry that referenced this issue Apr 5, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
bphaslett pushed a commit to bphaslett/android_kernel_amazon_karnak that referenced this issue Jul 9, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
adeii pushed a commit to adeii/huawei-london-kernel that referenced this issue Aug 27, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
adeii pushed a commit to adeii/huawei-london-kernel that referenced this issue Aug 28, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Chatur27 pushed a commit to Chatur27/Eureka-kernel-for-SM-A105-Pie that referenced this issue Oct 11, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Chatur27 pushed a commit to Chatur27/Eureka-kernel-for-SM-A105-Pie that referenced this issue Oct 11, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Chatur27 pushed a commit to Chatur27/Eureka-kernel-for-SM-A105-Pie that referenced this issue Oct 14, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Chatur27 pushed a commit to Chatur27/Eureka-kernel-for-SM-A305-Pie that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Huawei-Dev pushed a commit to Huawei-Dev/android_kernel_huawei_btv that referenced this issue Nov 14, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Huawei-Dev pushed a commit to Huawei-Dev/android_kernel_huawei_btv that referenced this issue Dec 24, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Chatur27 pushed a commit to Chatur27/Eureka-kernel-for-SM-A105-Pie that referenced this issue Dec 27, 2020
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Huawei-Dev pushed a commit to Huawei-Dev/android_kernel_huawei_btv that referenced this issue Jan 17, 2021
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
turex pushed a commit to turex/labyrinth_kernel_prague that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2021
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
ksant0s pushed a commit to ksant0s/android_kernel_samsung_universal8895 that referenced this issue Jan 13, 2022
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
ggow pushed a commit to lineage16-suez/kernel_amazon_suez that referenced this issue Apr 11, 2022
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

(cherry picked from commit 2cee7444b99b318d24716a2acadd08538dad0b8b)
youheng7185 pushed a commit to youheng7185/j2y18lte-kernel-upstream that referenced this issue Jun 4, 2023
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
FlorinelulX pushed a commit to FlorinelulX/android_kernel_huawei_hi6250-8 that referenced this issue Feb 15, 2024
commit 9c7be59fc519af9081c46c48f06f2b8fadf55ad8 upstream.

Various people have reported the Crucial MX100 512GB model not working
with LPM set to min_power. I've now received a report that it also does
not work with the new med_power_with_dipm level.

It does work with medium_power, but that has no measurable power-savings
and given the amount of people being bitten by the other levels not
working, this commit just disables LPM altogether.

Note all reporters of this have either the 512GB model (max capacity), or
are not specifying their SSD's size. So for now this quirk assumes this is
a problem with the 512GB model only.

Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89261
Buglink: linrunner/TLP#84
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests