From nobody Tue May 23 19:45:37 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4QQlQW6NXsz4Syd1 for ; Tue, 23 May 2023 19:54:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) Received: from uucp.dinoex.org (uucp.dinoex.org [IPv6:2a0b:f840::12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "uucp.dinoex.sub.de", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4QQlQV1XXPz3ktY for ; Tue, 23 May 2023 19:54:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org designates 2a0b:f840::12 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org; dmarc=none Received: from uucp.dinoex.org (uucp.dinoex.org [IPv6:2a0b:f840:0:0:0:0:0:12]) by uucp.dinoex.org (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 34NJs6mP076063 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 23 May 2023 21:54:06 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: Received: (from uucp@localhost) by uucp.dinoex.org (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) with UUCP id 34NJs59a076062 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 23 May 2023 21:54:05 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) Received: from admn.intra.daemon.contact (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by admn.intra.daemon.contact (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 34NJk56s031498 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 23 May 2023 21:46:06 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) Received: from intra.daemon.contact (news@localhost) by admn.intra.daemon.contact (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) with NNTP id 34NJjbmw031199 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 23 May 2023 21:45:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org) X-Authentication-Warning: admn.intra.daemon.contact: news set sender to li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org using -f From: "Peter 'PMc' Much" X-Newsgroups: m2n.fbsd.hackers Subject: Re: gpart destroy efi partition? Date: Tue, 23 May 2023 19:45:37 -0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Injection-Date: Tue, 23 May 2023 19:45:37 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: admn.intra.daemon.contact; logging-data="22004"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@citylink.dinoex.sub.org" User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (FreeBSD) To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: uucp.dinoex.org; Sender-ip: 0:0:2a0b:f840::; Sender-helo: uucp.dinoex.org;) X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.4 (uucp.dinoex.org [IPv6:2a0b:f840:0:0:0:0:0:12]); Tue, 23 May 2023 21:54:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.97 / 15.00]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.997]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.67)[-0.669]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.30)[-0.304]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[pmc@citylink.dinoex.sub.org,li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sub.org]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:205376, ipnet:2a0b:f840::/32, country:DE]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[pmc@citylink.dinoex.sub.org,li-fbsd@citylink.dinoex.sub.org] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4QQlQV1XXPz3ktY X-Spamd-Bar: / X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org On 2023-05-23, Warner Losh wrote: > > Without luck the drive encountered a condition that made it decide to lock > you out forever from writing again. As this was said to be an USB memstick... There are apparently problems with (some?) newer such memsticks: My old ones work fine with partitions of UFS or even ZFS. But my newer ones have horribly bad performance with UFS filesystems (and these are not the cheapest chinese pieces). It seems to me like they might have internal intelligence that optimizes for typical microsoft filesystems. So I once tried what would happen when I continue writing into an UFS filesystem on the stick no matter how long it takes - and what happened was exactly what Warner describes: after some time the thing switched itself to read-only. In fact I have a problem with this, because I need a means to store single files of 20+ GB on a stick.