Jump to content
XPEnology Community

TinyCore RedPill Loader Build Support Tool ( M-Shell )


Peter Suh

Recommended Posts

3 часа назад, -iliya- сказал:

how about add pannel with 26-32-48 drives?

 

We were thinking about user generated panels, at least in the rackmount variant. The user would set the number of "rows" and "columns" (something like "6x4") for the hard drive slots, and a PNG image would be generated after the assignment based on the tiles. However, this is too labour intensive to implement in a DSM environment for such non-important functionality.

 

3 часа назад, -iliya- сказал:

how about add pannel with 26-32-48 drives?

 

I can't imagine what it should look like. Can you provide some photos of actual 26-32-48 drive enclosures?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hi guys sorry for the noob question, but i just trying to install dms 7, i burn the image to ssd load up, i see screen wiht 4 boxes but i cannot fiend a way to load the auto menu where i can choose what to install, i type menu.sh or my.sh and nothing happens, i really need some help sorry about my English , tshank, 

 

nvm finally got it, control-c lol 

Edited by mata7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Peter Suh and all,

 

I ask the community about what is the general consensus about high-speed NIC cards working with TCRP:

 

  • what are the best 10Gbe NICs both RJ45 and/or SFP?
  • what are the best 25Gbe NICs both RJ45 and/or SFP?

and also what are the best SAS controllers that are compatible with TCRP? 

 

Thanks! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
В 25.06.2024 в 23:40, Hackaro1 сказал:

I ask the community

Since that:

Don't know about 10G Rj-45, but for SFP IMHO

 

For 10Gb/25Gb IMHO it's Mellanox Connect-X4 4111/4121-ACAT/XCAT as is not EOLed and cheap.

For 10Gb - Connect-X3 CX311/312 as plug-n-play non-problem (but not most cheap) card (Connect-X3 also supported by Syno itself).

But Connect-X3 EOLed and have some problem with modern Intel biG.liTTLE CPu's and Windows (if you don't use it under Windows, don't worry).

Edited by avacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi, can some one please help me, I have 18 drive but after installing M-Shell it only shows 11 disk. i remember when i use junloader i make some changes to be able to show all my disk, can some please tell how can I do to show all my drive, thanks in advanced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2024 at 7:10 AM, shibby said:

Do you want to install TCRP on baremetal or on virtualization like Proxmox?

 

Thanks! on Baremetal... I'm trying to understand how to build a machine for primary storage that will be connected to a Mac Studio. I'm a videographer freelance and I need something that has the speed to work with 4K ProRes videos.

 

On 6/27/2024 at 8:55 AM, avacha said:

Since that:

Don't know about 10G Rj-45, but for SFP IMHO

 

For 10Gb/25Gb IMHO it's Mellanox Connect-X4 4111/4121-ACAT/XCAT as is not EOLed and cheap.

For 10Gb - Connect-X3 CX311/312 as plug-n-play non-problem (but not most cheap) card (Connect-X3 also supported by Syno itself).

But Connect-X3 EOLed and have some problem with modern Intel biG.liTTLE CPu's and Windows (if you don't use it under Windows, don't worry).

 

Great! I'm not interested in 10Gb but much more in 25Gb. Thanks for the infos! :-) I was told that this Mellanox card is also suitable for working inside a PCI-ex box connected via Thunderbolt port to Mac's ... so I might ended up to connect P-2P two identical Mellanox card, one for Xpenology and one for Mac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2024 at 5:13 AM, shibby said:

 

thank you for you help, but I'm reading  the link English is not my first language and I cannot find the steps that I need to take, will you be so kind to please point me exactly to it, thank you very much again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Peter Suh I posted in the github discussion area:
https://github.com/PeterSuh-Q3/tinycore-redpill/discussions/39

posting here incase you / others would prefer to discuss here.

 

Quote

I've been trying to implement sata_remap as outline in this post:
https://xpenology.com/forum/topic/69296-how-to-remap-sata-ports-arpl-so-that-your-drives-are-shown-in-the-proper-order-in-dsm/

Is this supported in mshell? On my custom nas solution; the ports are misnumbered:

I tried the following options in user_config.json with no success:

"extra_cmdline": {
"pid": "0x6387",
"vid": "0x058f",
"sn":
"mac1":
"netif_num": "3",
"SataPortMap": "8",
"DiskIdxMap": "00",
"mac2":
"mac3":
"sata_remap": "0\>1:1\>0:3\>2:6\>3"
}

Any thoughts?

 

x299Nas.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Zitt said:

@Peter Suh I posted in the github discussion area:
https://github.com/PeterSuh-Q3/tinycore-redpill/discussions/39

posting here incase you / others would prefer to discuss here.

 

 

x299Nas.png

 

 

From my testing, the sata_remap command line option works very well.
There is a syntax error in your user_config.json.
not "sata_remap": "0\>1:1\>0:3\>2:6\>3"
"sata_remap": "0\\>1:1\\>0:3\\>2:6\\>3" is correct.
It must be written as so that the actual command line has the desired form with one "\" removed.

 

There was an example in a related topic.

 

 

 

2024-07-0510_25_01.thumb.png.74bdeb1cbe1cb3e8c528b92dae9729c1.png

 

[BEFORE]

 

2024-07-0510_16_12.png.eb16727988add9d874fd37fa4e1396bb.png

 

[AFTER]

 

2024-07-0510_24_48.png.c8b3b10e932204e8863aa1f924d8f913.png

 

 

I also took a capture right after building the loader.

 

2024-07-0510_31_02.png.f19adef4fcc0007d6e27e36c394d1c59.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had limited success but can't quiet figure out what is gong on.
Seems like the sata_remap is not intelligent. 

I was able to get the first two drives swapped using:

0\\>1:1\\>0

 

but the longer string didn't appear to work. 

I tried 

sata_remap=0\>0:1\>1:2\>3:3\>6:4\>7:5\>5:6\>4:7\>2

and it doesn't seem to work ... unsure why.

 

Physical Drive Drive SN Software Entry cmdline
0 UY 0 0\>0
1 ZY 1 1\>1
2 XY 3 2\>3
3 BE 6 3\>6
4 SB 7 4\>7
5 271 5 5\>5
6 D49 4 6\>4
7 Empty (2) 7\>2

 

I've looked at this again; going to try:

 

Physical Drive Drive SN Software Entry cmdline
0 UY 0 0\>0
1 ZY 1 1\>1
2 XY 3 3\>2
3 BE 6 6\>3
4 SB 7 7\>4
5 271 5 5\>5
6 D49 4 4\>6
7 Empty (2) 2\>7

Because I think it should be software entry \> physical drive. My first table mixes them up.

 

Edited by Zitt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zitt said:

I had limited success but can't quiet figure out what is gong on.
Seems like the sata_remap is not intelligent. 

I was able to get the first two drives swapped using:

0\\>1:1\\>0

 

but the longer string didn't appear to work. 

I tried 

sata_remap=0\>0:1\>1:2\>3:3\>6:4\>7:5\>5:6\>4:7\>2

and it doesn't seem to work ... unsure why.

 

Physical Drive Drive SN Software Entry cmdline
0 UY 0 0\>0
1 ZY 1 1\>1
2 XY 3 2\>3
3 BE 6 3\>6
4 SB 7 4\>7
5 271 5 5\>5
6 D49 4 6\>4
7 Empty (2) 7\>2

 

I've looked at this again; going to try:

 

Physical Drive Drive SN Software Entry cmdline
0 UY 0 0\>0
1 ZY 1 1\>1
2 XY 3 3\>2
3 BE 6 6\>3
4 SB 7 7\>4
5 271 5 5\>5
6 D49 4 4\>6
7 Empty (2) 2\>7

Because I think it should be software entry \> physical drive. My first table mixes them up.

 

 

Could you please leave these two values blank and test using only sata_remap?
"SataPortMap": "8","DiskIdxMap": "00"
It should change as shown below.
"SataPortMap": "","DiskIdxMap": ""

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[NOTICE]

v1.0.4.0 Added sata_remap processing menu for SataPort reordering.

 

2024-07-0711_45_26.png.2aec728c00b1903398e0636513bfb784.png

 

For non-DT based models such as DS3622xs+, DS3717xs, DS918+, DVA3221, etc., the disk number is displayed in Synology Disk Manager.

 

There is a phenomenon where the items are no longer visible in order starting from number 1.

 

Due to this problem, the bays do not appear to be filled in order and are spaced out in the storage bay.

 

If you use the sata_remap option, you can rearrange the disk order to make it look pretty without this problem.

 

So, you had to edit sata_remap, which we shared as a guide a few days ago, directly in user_config.json and use it.

 

I have automated the menu to make it easier to use.

 

According to TTG's instructions, in the case of my mshell, I do not recommend modifying SataPortMap and DiskIdxMap directly if possible.

 

Instead, if you leave these two command line options blank, as mentioned above, there is a problem in which the disk numbers are placed in Synology in the order of physically existing SataPorts.

 

To put it simply, it looks like this:

 

[Before]

2024-07-0510_16_12.png.256c8797fb8465999fa30b0d45744cbd.png

 

 

[After]

 

2024-07-0511_00_20.png.b47d61713c0704d164a1777ea4a9dd99.png

 

The values automatically set in user_config.json by the menu above are as follows.

"sata_remap": "0\\>0:2\\>1:3\\>2"

 

meaning

Relocate SataPort 0 to SataPort 0 (Disk 1, no change)

Relocate SataPort No. 2 to SataPort No. 1 (Disk 3->Disk 2)

Relocate SataPort No. 3 to SataPort No. 2 (Disk 4->Disk 3)

This is a command to move it.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Peter Suh

On 7/7/2024 at 10:12 AM, Peter Suh said:

The values automatically set in user_config.json by the menu above are as follows.

"sata_remap": "0\\>0:2\\>1:3\\>2"


Are we SURE this is working correctly?

I went in a few days ago and got my SATA wiring squared away so that when using bare metal Mshell/Xpenology the drives were in order. IE in order; correct... in storage manager w/o any need for sata_remap on the command line. 

Since my NAS box has a X299 w/ Intel I9-10980XE with 36 threads and 96MB memory; I wanted to see how it works under ProxMox 8.2.4 so I can use the other 12 threads and memory for another virtual machine.

I got the system to boot using the VMDK image and have passed the SATA controller to the Xpenology virtual machine as a pcie passthrough. This works well since I didn't want the drives being reported as QEMU drives.

Anyway; with the passthrough; the system puts all the drives in order starting with 7 .. 15. 

Thinking fair enough; I tried to use sata_remap to put them back at 0..7. Only it doesn't work 100% correct. Here's the data I've correlated in table form:
        

Physical Drive Drive SN No Sata Remap cmdline Actual Results Expected
0 UY 7 7>0 7 (6) 1(0)
1 ZY 8 8>1 1 (0) 2(1)
2 XY 9 9>2 2 (1) 3(2)
3 BE 10 10>3 3 (2) 4(3)
4 SB 11 11>4 4 (3) 5(4)
5 271 12 12>5 5 (4) 6(5)
6 D49 13 13>6 6 (5) 7(6)
7 Empty 14 14>7   (7)

 

Command Line:
ProxmoxSataRemapLine.thumb.png.3c95432b626bc42a98b8d3aa6c76fb29.png

 

After as seen in Storage manager:
ProxmoxSataRemap.thumb.png.3c0782542d1082afcff268d0604b9d1b.png


It's almost like the satamap works "almost" right as if it's somewhat zero based and also not zero based. Everything I've read indicates Drive 1 in the storage manager is really '0' in the sata_remap.
Thoughts? 

Edited by Zitt
clearification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Zitt said:

After as seen in Storage manager:

@Peter Suh Here's a screen shot showing the drives before I apply any sata_remap:

ProxmoxBeforeSataRemap.thumb.png.c02d03c8af0d92cf7aacb407120007bf.pngNote that Serial N8GVH2UY is listed as drive 7 without a sata_remap. 

 

When I tell it sata_remap=7\>0 it doesn't appear to work properly. 

NEVERMIND: The error was mine all along. I forgot to subtract 1 from the physical drive while I was doing for the relocated position. I found this by just doing a single drive 7\>0 and saw the behavior was the same. 6\>0 was the correct solution. Doh!
 

Here's the corrected sata_remap for my configuration:
ProxmoxCorrectedSataRemap.thumb.png.6c87a3b1303147344fe52d13e5a398f3.png

Edited by Zitt
Doh!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Zitt said:

@Peter Suh Here's a screen shot showing the drives before I apply any sata_remap:

ProxmoxBeforeSataRemap.thumb.png.c02d03c8af0d92cf7aacb407120007bf.pngNote that Serial N8GVH2UY is listed as drive 7 without a sata_remap. 

 

When I tell it sata_remap=7\>0 it doesn't appear to work properly. 

NEVERMIND: The error was mine all along. I forgot to subtract 1 from the physical drive while I was doing for the relocated position. I found this by just doing a single drive 7\>0 and saw the behavior was the same. 6\>0 was the correct solution. Doh!
 

Here's the corrected sata_remap for my configuration:
ProxmoxCorrectedSataRemap.thumb.png.6c87a3b1303147344fe52d13e5a398f3.png

 

Why not try my new solution?
You can avoid mistakes caused by manual mapping.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...