NooL Posted May 30, 2020 Share #101 Posted May 30, 2020 Any idea why only 1 of the 2 identical drives is listed correctly with name? They are identical drives so a bit puzzling.. DSM also gave the warning about using different drives for NVME cache when recreating it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlozde Posted June 3, 2020 Share #102 Posted June 3, 2020 (edited) Thanks for all the efford. Works on "6.2.3-25426". Just one question, I can not select R/W cache. It is disabled, any guess why ? I'll answer my question. It will help next hits. It is greyed out because I only have one nvme drive installed that is why I am limited with the read-only cache. Edited June 3, 2020 by Jlozde Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervincm Posted June 3, 2020 Share #103 Posted June 3, 2020 you guessed correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcVirus Posted June 4, 2020 Share #104 Posted June 4, 2020 После обновления на 6.2.3-25426, отвалился кеш. выше инструкцией все сделал, все заработало в штатном режиме! Спасибо! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsTuRkInG Posted June 5, 2020 Share #105 Posted June 5, 2020 I am having some problem with the configuration of my nvme in a clean installation 6.2.3 through ssh it is seen that the system recognizes the disk but in the storage manager it does not appear I have tried the script provided in previous pages but I don't get anything: S root@abc:~# nvme list Node SN Model Namespace Usage Format FW Rev ---------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------- ---------------- -------- /dev/nvme0n1 1842E1D1E662 CT500P1SSD8 1 500.11 GB / 500.11 GB 512 B + 0 B P3CR010 /dev/nvme0n1p1 1842E1D1E662 CT500P1SSD8 1 500.11 GB / 500.11 GB 512 B + 0 B P3CR010 /dev/nvme0n1p2 1842E1D1E662 CT500P1SSD8 1 500.11 GB / 500.11 GB 512 B + 0 B P3CR010 /dev/nvme0n1p3 1842E1D1E662 CT500P1SSD8 1 500.11 GB / 500.11 GB 512 B + 0 B P3CR010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervincm Posted June 5, 2020 Share #106 Posted June 5, 2020 You need to get the script to work, otherwise it doesnt modify the piece required and DSM will not see your NVME drives. the linux subsystem will see them, but nothing in the DSM storage manager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervincm Posted June 5, 2020 Share #107 Posted June 5, 2020 On 5/14/2020 at 10:54 AM, The Chief said: It works on -25426 without any glitch. Feel free to update. worked for me. forgot to post earlier thx! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsTuRkInG Posted June 5, 2020 Share #108 Posted June 5, 2020 I don't know whay i'm doing wrong I put libNVMEpatch.sh on /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ with 0755 permisions and reboot. This isn't enough? The drive must be with a partition table specific or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackaro Posted June 11, 2020 Share #109 Posted June 11, 2020 On 6/5/2020 at 12:55 PM, AsTuRkInG said: I don't know whay i'm doing wrong I put libNVMEpatch.sh on /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ with 0755 permisions and reboot. This isn't enough? The drive must be with a partition table specific or something? Please have a look at posts: 91 / 93 / 98 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarieri Posted June 22, 2020 Share #110 Posted June 22, 2020 Does anyone know how to remove this nvme patch so that one can use the nvme drive as storage again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervincm Posted June 22, 2020 Share #111 Posted June 22, 2020 Synology does not permit the use of NVME as storage, only cache, at lease in the 918+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarieri Posted June 22, 2020 Share #112 Posted June 22, 2020 22 minutes ago, mervincm said: Synology does not permit the use of NVME as storage, only cache, at lease in the 918+ Yes, I understand that but before applying the NVME patch, synology recognize nvme drives as normal drives only available to use as storage drives. So, I'm just wondering if there's a way to remove the patch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted June 22, 2020 Share #113 Posted June 22, 2020 (edited) That is incorrect. Without the patch they are not recognized at all by Synology's utilities (they are accessible by Linux). You can hack them in as storage but it is not supported or safe, and it does not matter whether the patch is installed or not. If you want to remove the patch, put the original file back. Edited June 22, 2020 by flyride 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarieri Posted June 22, 2020 Share #114 Posted June 22, 2020 7 hours ago, flyride said: That is incorrect. Without the patch they are not recognized at all by Synology's utilities (they are accessible by Linux). You can hack them in as storage but it is not supported or safe, and it does not matter whether the patch is installed or not. If you want to remove the patch, put the original file back. Thank you so much for clearification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddogg777 Posted July 1, 2020 Share #115 Posted July 1, 2020 On 4/18/2020 at 3:35 AM, The Chief said: Patched .so.1 — try to directly replace it in /lib64. libsynonvme.so.1 36.76 kB · 141 downloads Just to be clear this is all we need to do if we didn't use the previous shellscript? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted July 18, 2020 Share #116 Posted July 18, 2020 The lib file is overwritten by 6.2.3-25426-2 and the current patch no longer works. Anyone using a r/w cache is strongly urged to remove it prior to upgrading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerMoeJoe Posted July 18, 2020 Share #117 Posted July 18, 2020 But the read only cache still works with the new Update. Gesendet von meinem Mi A3 mit Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted July 21, 2020 Share #118 Posted July 21, 2020 libsynonvme.so after 6.2.3-25426-2 update is exactly the same as in 6.2.3-25426. R/O cache works as before in my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted July 21, 2020 Share #119 Posted July 21, 2020 Weird, mine doesn't. I'll check into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted July 21, 2020 Share #120 Posted July 21, 2020 2 минуты назад, flyride сказал: Weird, mine doesn't. I'll check into it. Try R/O mode first. I assume you used R/W cache before and it doesn't work anymore, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted July 21, 2020 Share #121 Posted July 21, 2020 No, I never use r/w cache, and really I only have cache for a test system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted July 21, 2020 Share #122 Posted July 21, 2020 root@archive:/usr/lib# ls -la *nvme* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 May 19 19:54 libsynonvme.so -> libsynonvme.so.1 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 37642 Jul 18 11:15 libsynonvme.so.1 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 37642 Jul 18 11:15 libsynonvme.so.1.bak root@archive:/usr/lib# diff libsynonvme.so.1 libsynonvme.so.1.bak Binary files libsynonvme.so.1 and libsynonvme.so.1.bak differ root@archive:/usr/lib# tail -5 /var/log/messages 2020-07-21T09:03:41-07:00 archive synostoraged: nvme_slot_info_get.c:119 Fail to strip the address of device from PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme 2020-07-21T09:03:41-07:00 archive synostoraged: nvme_slot_info_get.c:119 Fail to strip the address of device from PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme 2020-07-21T09:04:41-07:00 archive synostoraged: SYSTEM: Last message 'nvme_slot_info_get.c' repeated 1 times, suppressed by syslog-ng on archive 2020-07-21T09:04:41-07:00 archive synostoraged: nvme_slot_info_get.c:119 Fail to strip the address of device from PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme 2020-07-21T09:04:41-07:00 archive synostoraged: nvme_slot_info_get.c:119 Fail to strip the address of device from PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme root@archive:/usr/lib# Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyride Posted July 21, 2020 Share #123 Posted July 21, 2020 root@archive:/usr/lib# nvme list Node SN Model Namespace Usage Format FW Rev ---------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------- ---------------- -------- /dev/nvme0n1 PHBT721608GH016D INTEL MEMPEK1W016GA 1 14.40 GB / 14.40 GB 512 B + 0 B K3110310 /dev/nvme0n1p1 PHBT721608GH016D INTEL MEMPEK1W016GA 1 14.40 GB / 14.40 GB 512 B + 0 B K3110310 root@archive:/usr/lib# udevadm info /dev/nvme0 P: /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:13.0/0000:01:00.0/nvme/nvme0 N: nvme0 E: DEVNAME=/dev/nvme0 E: DEVPATH=/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:13.0/0000:01:00.0/nvme/nvme0 E: MAJOR=250 E: MINOR=0 E: PHYSDEVBUS=pci E: PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme E: PHYSDEVPATH=/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:13.0/0000:01:00.0 E: SUBSYSTEM=nvme E: SYNO_INFO_PLATFORM_NAME=apollolake E: SYNO_KERNEL_VERSION=4.4 E: USEC_INITIALIZED=212638 root@archive:/usr/lib# Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted July 21, 2020 Share #124 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 10 минут назад, flyride сказал: Fail to strip the address of device from PHYSDEVDRIVER=nvme Output of 'sha1sum -b /lib64/libsynonvme.so.1', if you please. Should be 00a912f7166f0e275dd0281724ca299eebd166ee. Edited July 21, 2020 by The Chief Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervincm Posted July 21, 2020 Share #125 Posted July 21, 2020 I applied -2 patch to my test system via auto update and , as a test, I even left the read-only cache on NVME enabled. For some strange reason it failed to restart correctly (OS didnt appear to start) but with a physical power down and power up, everythings seems to be working, NVME R-O cache still working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.