-Original Message-
From: Robin Axelsson [mailto:gu99r...@student.chalmers.se]
Sent: 21 October 2012 12:03
To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Only one SSD detected on expander
The worst case would be if the firmware image is signed
hope it is the same problem for you
thanks
CArl
-Original Message-
From: Robin Axelsson [mailto:gu99r...@student.chalmers.se]
Sent: 21 October 2012 12:03
To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Only one SSD detected on expander
The worst case would be if the firmware image is signed and encrypted,
which I doubt. There is a workaround for that too if that would be the
case anyway. I'm not sure whether those firmware images have a real
file system (such as yaffs for Android devices) or are just a solid
binary file.
in the gui list
this was for Samsung disk as well
hope it is the same problem for you
thanks
CArl
-Original Message-
From: Robin Axelsson [mailto:gu99r...@student.chalmers.se]
Sent: 21 October 2012 12:03
To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Only one
Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Only one SSD detected on expander
The worst case would be if the firmware image is signed and encrypted, which
I doubt. There is a workaround for that too if that would be the case anyway.
I'm not sure whether those firmware images have a real file system
It's probably easier to return the drive and get something not labelled Samsung…
- Opprinnelig melding -
Isn't it possible to somehow make the drive dump the firmware somehow,
edit it with a HEX editor (and recalculate firmware checksums) and
flash
the modified .bin file back to the
Isn't it possible to somehow make the drive dump the firmware somehow,
edit it with a HEX editor (and recalculate firmware checksums) and flash
the modified .bin file back to the drive? I guess that the WWN must be
found in the firmware somewhere.
On 2012-10-19 02:38, Scott Marcy wrote:
On 19/10/2012 11:48, Robin Axelsson wrote:
Isn't it possible to somehow make the drive dump the firmware somehow, edit it
with a HEX editor (and recalculate firmware checksums) and flash the modified
.bin file back to the drive? I guess that the WWN must be found in the firmware
somewhere.
On 19/10/12 09:29 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
On 19/10/2012 11:48, Robin Axelsson wrote:
Isn't it possible to somehow make the drive dump the firmware somehow, edit it
with a HEX editor (and recalculate firmware checksums) and flash the modified
.bin file back to the drive? I guess that the
On 19/10/12 09:29 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
Usually, you can read and write drive firmware with fwflash.
On 19/10/2012 14:11, James C. McPherson wrote:
Reading firmware from the disk is not supported with fwflash.
Ouch, indeed only IB devices are readable.
--
Dr.Udo Grabowski
FWIW, this is what Samsung tech support had to say about the SSD 840 Pro:
The next generation Samsung SSD 840 Pro series will have WWN. The Samsung 840
Pro is aimed for customers who need to use them on servers which is why only
the 840 Pro will have the WWN identifier.
Guess I'll get in line
So one more data point that seems to suggest that I'm getting duplicate names
from these drives. When I attach at least one of the Samsung SSDs to each
expander (front and back), I get this:
$ cfgadm -al
Ap_Id Type Receptacle Occupant Condition
c6
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Scott Marcy wrote:
Note that both c6 and c8 have the exact same name for these drives.
I *CAN* access the two drives separately, but why on earth am I
getting these duplicates? This means I can only reliably access one
Samsung SSD per expander.
Do you have multipath
SATA devices are not required to provide a WWN - I would guess that
they're providing the same WWN, and as a result, your SAS devices are
becoming sad.
If you could tell the expander(s) to ignore that and assign one,
that'd be neat. If there's a firmware update to fix it, even better.
If you want
Ah, I see now. Yes, all the drives report the same LU WWN Device Id in
smartctl, and I see the same constant WWN reported online (for example,
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.linux.utilities.smartmontools.database/page=7).
I'll see what Samsung has to say.
Thanks! This at least gives me more to
it'd be interesting to see what WWN smartctl -l would report from these. I've
worked with SATA SSDs in similar setups, but never seen them reported with the
same WWN
roy
- Opprinnelig melding -
Ah, I see now. Yes, all the drives report the same LU WWN Device Id in
smartctl, and I see
make that smartctl -i …
you may have to add -d sat to that
roy
- Opprinnelig melding -
it'd be interesting to see what WWN smartctl -l would report from
these. I've worked with SATA SSDs in similar setups, but never seen
them reported with the same WWN
roy
- Opprinnelig
that's strange indeed - I've never seen two SATA drives with the same WWN. May
Samsung have doen something 'smart' here to stop people from using 'cheap'
drives for serious stuff?
roy
- Opprinnelig melding -
Sure.
Here's the only one that can be seen in the expander:
$ smartctl
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Scott Marcy wrote:
I called Samsung and they basically told me there was nothing they
could do. The guy I spoke with said the 830s weren't intended to be
used in servers. (He did seem to understand what I was talking
about, which was actually more than I expected from
I am returning the 4 drives I planned to use in the expanders, but will keep
the two I'm using as my mirrored boot pool.
My intention was to use these are ZIL and L2ARC drives, so I can do without
them for now. I've had very good luck with these Samsung drives in non-SAS
usages—quite a bit
Hi all,
I'm new to the list and OI, but I've been running a Solaris box with some
version of ZFS on it for a couple years. I recently acquired a Supermicro
6047R-E1R36N. It has an X9DRi-LN4F+ motherboard, dual E5-2620s and 48GB of RAM.
I soon learned that I needed a different HBA (it comes
21 matches
Mail list logo
