More and more systems are coming with M2 on RAID and Linux doesn't
work unless you change the system out of RAID mode. This is becoming
more and more of a problem. What is the status of Linux support for
the new systems?
TIA!!
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:09:42PM -0800, David F. wrote:
> More and more systems are coming with M2 on RAID and Linux doesn't
> work unless you change the system out of RAID mode. This is becoming
> more and more of a problem. What is the status of Linux support for
> the new systems?
Your message doesn't make sense at all. MD works on absolutely any
Linux block device, and I've used it on plenty M.2 form factor devices -
not that the form factor has anything to do with how Linux would treat
a device.
On 2017-03-06 23:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:09:42PM -0800, David F. wrote:
>> More and more systems are coming with M2 on RAID and Linux doesn't
>> work unless you change the system out of RAID mode. This is becoming
>> more and more of a problem. What is the status of Linux support for
>> the new systems?
>
> Your message doesn't make sense at all. MD works on absolutely any
> Linux block device, and I've used it on plenty M.2 form factor devices -
> not that the form factor has anything to do with how Linux would treat
> a device.
>
He's referring to the RAID mode most modern Intel chipsets have, which
(last I checked) Linux does not support completely and many OEM's are
setting by default on new systems because it apparently provides better
performance than AHCI even for a single device. The bigger issue with
this is that it's damn near impossible to get to the firmware on many
new systems, and even if you can, some OEM's aren't even giving the
option to use AHCI mode instead of the RAID mode.
The whole M.2 thing is absolutely bogus though, my thought is that
people are conflating the two because this switch to using RAID mode by
default is happening concurrently with a general movement towards using
M.2 devices as primary storage.
On 03/06/2017 09:52 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:09:42PM -0800, David F. wrote:
>> More and more systems are coming with M2 on RAID and Linux doesn't
>> work unless you change the system out of RAID mode. This is becoming
>> more and more of a problem. What is the status of Linux support for
>> the new systems?
>
> Your message doesn't make sense at all. MD works on absolutely any
> Linux block device, and I've used it on plenty M.2 form factor devices -
> not that the form factor has anything to do with how Linux would treat
> a device.
I have a feeling he's talking about this [1] issue.
[1]:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3123075/linux/linux-wont-install-on-your-laptop-blame-intel-not-microsoft.html
On 2017-03-07 10:15, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 09:50:22AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
>> He's referring to the RAID mode most modern Intel chipsets have, which (last
>> I checked) Linux does not support completely and many OEM's are setting by
>> default on new systems because it apparently provides better performance
>> than AHCI even for a single device.
>
> It actually provides worse performance. What it does it that it shoves
> up to three nvme device bars into the bar of an AHCI device, and
> requires the OS to handle them all using a single driver. The Money's
> on crack at Intel decided to do that to provide their "valueable" RSTe
> IP (which is a windows ATA + RAID driver in a blob, which now has also
> grown a NVMe driver). The only remotely sane thing is to disable it
> in the bios, and burn all people involved with it. The next best thing
> is to provide a fake PCIe root port driver untangling this before it
> hits the driver, but unfortunately Intel is unwilling to either do this
> on their own or at least provide enough documentation for others to do
> it.
>
For NVMe, yeah, it hurts performance horribly. For SATA devices though,
it's hit or miss, some setups perform better, some perform worse.
It does have one advantage though, it lets you put the C drive for a
Windows install on a soft-RAID array insanely easily compared to trying
to do so through Windows itself (although still significantly less
easily that doing the equivalent on Linux...).
The cynic in me is tempted to believe that the OEM's who are turning it
on by default are trying to either:
1. Make their low-end systems look even crappier in terms of performance
while adding to their marketing checklist (Of the systems I've seen that
have this on by default, most were cheap ones with really low specs).
2. Actively make it harder to run anything but Windows on their hardware.
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 09:50:22AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> He's referring to the RAID mode most modern Intel chipsets have, which (last
> I checked) Linux does not support completely and many OEM's are setting by
> default on new systems because it apparently provides better performance
> than AHCI even for a single device.
It actually provides worse performance. What it does it that it shoves
up to three nvme device bars into the bar of an AHCI device, and
requires the OS to handle them all using a single driver. The Money's
on crack at Intel decided to do that to provide their "valueable" RSTe
IP (which is a windows ATA + RAID driver in a blob, which now has also
grown a NVMe driver). The only remotely sane thing is to disable it
in the bios, and burn all people involved with it. The next best thing
is to provide a fake PCIe root port driver untangling this before it
hits the driver, but unfortunately Intel is unwilling to either do this
on their own or at least provide enough documentation for others to do
it.
Very possible it affects other devices attached, but all consumer
reports and test systems here all have NVME drives on m2 and when in
RAID mode. Listing PCI data linux will show Intel SATA controller
detected in RAID mode, but no drives detected, all you get is your
/dev/sda USB boot device. A lot of places linux uses a table of known
ID's and if not listed doesn't support it, unlike Windows which always
supports the given generic device type when it can (keyboard, etc..)
and special drivers for special features. RAID of course is different
an typically requires special drivers. As mentioned, some system
don't let you change the mode, others you can't use linux as a
maintenance platform since it won't see any of the drives. Just be
nice to have things "just work".
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2017-03-07 10:15, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 09:50:22AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
>>>
>>> He's referring to the RAID mode most modern Intel chipsets have, which
>>> (last
>>> I checked) Linux does not support completely and many OEM's are setting
>>> by
>>> default on new systems because it apparently provides better performance
>>> than AHCI even for a single device.
>>
>>
>> It actually provides worse performance. What it does it that it shoves
>> up to three nvme device bars into the bar of an AHCI device, and
>> requires the OS to handle them all using a single driver. The Money's
>> on crack at Intel decided to do that to provide their "valueable" RSTe
>> IP (which is a windows ATA + RAID driver in a blob, which now has also
>> grown a NVMe driver). The only remotely sane thing is to disable it
>> in the bios, and burn all people involved with it. The next best thing
>> is to provide a fake PCIe root port driver untangling this before it
>> hits the driver, but unfortunately Intel is unwilling to either do this
>> on their own or at least provide enough documentation for others to do
>> it.
>>
> For NVMe, yeah, it hurts performance horribly. For SATA devices though,
> it's hit or miss, some setups perform better, some perform worse.
>
> It does have one advantage though, it lets you put the C drive for a Windows
> install on a soft-RAID array insanely easily compared to trying to do so
> through Windows itself (although still significantly less easily that doing
> the equivalent on Linux...).
>
> The cynic in me is tempted to believe that the OEM's who are turning it on
> by default are trying to either:
> 1. Make their low-end systems look even crappier in terms of performance
> while adding to their marketing checklist (Of the systems I've seen that
> have this on by default, most were cheap ones with really low specs).
> 2. Actively make it harder to run anything but Windows on their hardware.