"HPA/DCO data unavailable, cannot determine hidden sector status" and DIF/DIX (aka PI) protection Information field or type 2 formatting. #234
Replies: 23 comments 93 replies
-
perhaps there a method or PRNG that doesn't check for HPA/DCO? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
A command line option to disable HPA/DCO could be added, this would have to be reflected in the report that HPA/DCO check is disabled, but would give a green tick and no warnings. How many drives do you see this on and are you using the very latest version of nwipe? I'd like to hear what others feel about HPA/DCO checks and what the message might be for a drive that won't respond to HPA/DCO commands like some recent enterprise discs and discs attached via some usb adapters. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
just ran 80 drives. all of them gave this error. these are 4kn drives with type 2 protection enabled. on a second batch of these many just plain failed to finish wiping alltogether. reran wipe using a different program and wiped fine so drives are not bad. getting rid of this error/ warning would be ideal .36 version running on mint SEAGATE ST8000NM0065 vendor: SEAGATE |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
by default we have ignore read and write, because we need the wipe to finish no matter what. actually that would be a good option to add to nwipe. all the drives are 100% health. no realocated sectors. no read or write errors. wondering if its more to do with the type 2 protection. example - i know trunas core has issues with it but trunas scale can handle. just throwing out ideas |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Not all are at 100% health, there's 3 drives amongst those 84 that are reporting 0% health, imminent failure.
That's a possibility, personally I've not tested with drives that are type 2 protection formatted. As I've read, the controller formats them as a slightly larger size than 512 or 4096 and uses that as some error correction? But presents the correct block size back to the OS. Apparently they can be reformatted as standard blocks but I guess it depends on the controller. Anybody that has a better knowledge of these drives please feel free to jump in. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
killdisk at about 50% done no stops yet. ill run them again using nwipe after. may be a few days before i get info for you. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Similar to u/thebearnecessities, I'm also clearing drives for donations. Forgive my ignorance, but is it possible that this affects SAS drives specifically? I recently cleared 8 drives, 1 SATA and 7 SAS, and the SATA drive cleared as expected without any warnings in the report. I googled if HPA/DCO is an ATA-specific technology, and it seems to be, but I don't know enough about SAS drives to say it's conclusive. If it matters, I'm using an older SuperMicro chassis with a backplane connected to an HBA to clear them. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
update here, drives doing same thing with same batch. ill hopefully have a log to share in the next few days. will that log show up where the certs normal go? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The SAS drives we test with don't support DCO/HPA, hence the [HS? ???] Status response, however it possible some drives do, although at the moment we don't know which models those are or even if they exist. SAS drives do use the ata command set as used by SATA drives however they don't necessarily support all commands including those to retrieve the HPA/DCO status, so theoretically |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@PartialVolume I just finished testing nwipe v0.37 with the PDF feature (which I absolutely love!). I have 9 out of 10 drives giving the HPA/DCO warning. Out of them 4 SAS all gave the warning, only one SATA drive did not. If there is a way I can contribute to improve this feature I happily help. (i.e I have quite a few drives (SAS and SATA) waiting for erasure and can provide more details if that helps.) BTW: would it be possible to add the SMART self-check result to the first page under Disk information? The two smart pages with details are great but having the status on the first page would help to quickly see if a device is still good for use or not. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Referring back to your first comment
For the drives that report HPA/DCO warnings, I think we need to determine whether the warnings were caused by a HPA/DCO status of ??? because the drive wasn't responding to the commands to determine DCO or whether nwipe did indeed detect a hidden block/s in which case the DCO and HPA status would have said yes, in which case the drives HPA/DCO should be cleared using hdparm or other tools so the whole of the drive can be fully wiped. That would be the appropriate action first before wiping the drive. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Thinking about a HPA/DCO status that can not be determined due to either the drive not supporting DCO or the interface not supporting ATA pass through, which then results in a PDF report that says erased but with a warning.. Maybe under that circumstance I could put a option in the configuration that allows the user to generate a report without the warning and exclamation icon on the report, but instead simply says erased and in the HPA/DCO field just says "HPA/DCO check disabled by user". I'm guessing though that an inquisitive customer might ask why HPA/DCO was disabled by the user and what's the significance of disabling HPA/DCO checks. The problem is you could also have a drive with a hidden area that can't be detected if the interface doesn't support ATA pass through, like a lot of USB adapters. The report needs to issue a warning in this case, because it physically can't check the HPA/DCO status unless its connected to an interface that does allow ATA pass through. I'm concerned that if nwipe had an option that completely disabled HPA/DCO checks and there was a hidden area that contained who knows what, the report in that circumstance should not show that the drive had been fully erased when in fact there was this hidden area that hadn't been wiped. That wouldn't look good. SAS is problematic for me as I don't know whether most SAS drives supports HPA/DCO like their SATA cousins. In theory I should be able to issue a device identify command and check whether DCO is supported. If not then I might be able to set the HPA/DCO status as What I need is nwipe -q -v --logfile=log.txt` logs of lots of different SAS drives with different controllers so I can see how they are responding at a low level. Any comments are always appreciated. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I can see that the SAS drives are not responding to the hdparm request or nwipes built in low level code for DCO identify etc. This maybe because they don't support the ATA commands, maybe just SCSI commands. I'll see if I can get hold of a programming manual for these 12TB Seagate SAS drives. It's possible they don't support HPA/DCO or AMA (host protected area/drive configuration overlay or Accessible maximum address) as they only communicate using the SCSI command set. I need to do a little research. If anybody understands these SAS drives in terms of low level commands or has any sources of information, please let me know. In the meantime I'll see what I can figure out. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Committed SAS HPA/DCO patch martijnvanbrummelen/nwipe@8a93e88 @FreeMinded I'll build ShredOS with this update and provide you with a download link ASAP. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
As a side note: I have rerun the same drives from the very first batch (#234 (comment)) over and over again. The HPA/DCO detection issue disappeared and the drives wiped OK (all green in the PDF) and except for one drive which seems to be somehow broken. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Instead of "Not applicable" or "HPA/DCO check disabled by user" it could say |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
or could this be caused by smartctl not supporting it? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
or add a new Disk Information item called 'HPA/DCO Status':
and if nwipe finds its unsupported remove the 2 items If 'HPA/DCO Status' is supported then keep the 2 items with whatever variables you have them populated. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
it could be caused by using a card not supporting smartctl like HP P822.
… Firminator ***@***.***> hat am 17.09.2024 05:11 CEST geschrieben:
or could this be caused by smartctl not supporting it?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#234 (comment)
You are receiving this because you commented.
Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@PartialVolume is there an ETA for the next release containing this changes? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@FreeMinded I try to release at 6 months intervals or earlier so the last release was May so I'm probably looking at mid November. I also want to get the additional host specific PDF option included in that release. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hello, some of my remarks:
regards |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
2000 drives simultaneously has got to be a record. I've never seen more the 50 simultaneously wiped. That has to be some serious hardware. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi there, Is there anyway of getting nwipe to not give this error, because its not a security/data risk I care about, but it might freak out the person who gets the report lol.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions