My laptop is working just fine. It’s from 2018 and it has an NVME drive.

It has an EFI boot partition and other partition with LUKS and LVM on top of that.

Since this week I see these logs from time to time:

Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: pcieport 0000:00:1d.6: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, (Receiver ID)
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: pcieport 0000:00:1d.6:   device [8086:34b6] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: pcieport 0000:00:1d.6:    [ 0] RxErr                  (First)
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: pcieport 0000:00:1d.6: AER:   Error of this Agent is reported first
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: nvme 0000:02:00.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical Layer, (Receiver ID)
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: nvme 0000:02:00.0:   device [8086:0975] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
Mar 07 17:31:14 almendra kernel: nvme 0000:02:00.0:    [ 0] RxErr                  (First)

The devices are:

$ lspci -vv | grep 1d.6
00:1d.6 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Device 34b6 (rev 30) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])

$ lspci -vv | grep 02:00.0
02:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller: Intel Corporation Optane NVME SSD H10 with Solid State Storage [Teton Glacier] (prog-if 02 [NVM Express])

The laptop works like always, but I have the impression that the NVME drive is telling me something bad.

It happens from time to time:

$ journalctl --since yesterday | grep -c "nvme 0000:02:00.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Corrected, type=Physical"
9

Do you know what does it mean?

  • Possibly linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Doing a scrub on bad hardware will make corruption worse in many cases. When you have faulty hardware freeze everything

    This person has had the same device for 6 years. If the drive was used heavily it probably just failed due to age

    • rotopenguin@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, you’re probably right. I’m thinking in terms of “not a raid, no redundant copies available” scrub, where the main output would be a sanity check of data checksums.