X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AED9E385DC1A
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1701969007;
	bh=3U3tIpRNrdqusrUF0OidigHLPNmGIjVBkP5nQswgHpQ=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	From;
	b=PH0z+x7yXYv6K0FXIFhm7Y3fBqkXlNrW8vB8iKEnpdYvqobcPMqtJmMcPdu4Avyqt
	P98hLvmLic915KcAjkH0mhKdEGatHyPYg4+zdUQ/XAxR8XiBLqgpnugfndx3qyGKKe
	/2G/15cg+aXJxuwmH1EklvFvd5uI01ny22Xn39cE=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CEAFD3858423
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2023 18:09:51 +0100
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: getVolInfo question
Message-ID:	<ZXH8X4Iy5pXAF9HJ@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<DM8PR09MB7095D4EC6ACCE0FD995AC0BFA58BA AT DM8PR09MB7095 DOT namprd09 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com>
	<ZXH7NKbZXz3Mr3DG AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<ZXH7NKbZXz3Mr3DG@calimero.vinschen.de>
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Dec  7 18:04, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> On Dec  7 15:35, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via Cygwin wrote:
> > Hi Corinna,
> > 
> > I have a question about this tool getVolInfo that has recently "made the news".
> > 
> > Just updated my version to the latest and tried it on my drive C:, and specifically this is what bugs me:
> > 
> > $ /usr/lib/csih/getVolInfo.exe .
> > ...
> > SectorInfoFlags    : 0x03
> >   SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY      : FALSE
> >   SSINFO_FLAGS_TRIM_ENABLED         : FALSE
> > 
> > I presume the values shown are described here:
> > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-fscc/3e75d97f-1d0b-4e47-b435-73c513837a57
> > 
> > But my drive (well, all NTFS) does have TRIM enabled:
> > 
> > $ fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify
> > DisableDeleteNotify = 0
> > 
> > Which is also confirmed by other tools... (like SSD "dashboards" etc.)
> 
> Yes, but!
> 
> fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify *only* shows if the OS
> supports disabledeletenotify, i.e., TRIM, on a system-wide base(*).
> It does *not* tell you if TRIM is really enabled on an existing
> filesystem on any of your drives.
> 
> TRIM is only enabled on a filesystem, if the underlying drive
> actually supports TRIM.  The majority of SSDs support it, but not
> necessarily all SSDs.
> 
> The above values, in particular SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY being
> FALSE, indicate that your drive is actually not an SSD, but a rotating
> harddisk, or it's an SSD which fakes to be a rotating harddisk.
> 
> I have a laptop with a Samsung 830 SSD, and getVolInfo prints:
> 
>   SectorInfoFlags    : 0x0f
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY      : TRUE
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_TRIM_ENABLED         : TRUE
> 
> I'm running a with NTFS and ReFS on virtual filebacked drives,
             ^^^
          a Qemu/KVM VM

> the ReFS actually spanning two virtual drives.
> 
> csih prints
> 
>   SectorInfoFlags    : 0x0b
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY      : FALSE
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_TRIM_ENABLED         : TRUE
> 
> for the NTFS FS, and
> 
>   SectorInfoFlags    : 0x03
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_NO_SEEK_PENALTY      : FALSE
>     SSINFO_FLAGS_TRIM_ENABLED         : FALSE
> 
> for the ReFS FS.

Needless to say that on both systems, fsutil prints:

Windows-10$ fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify
NTFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Disabled)
ReFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Disabled)

Windows-11$ fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify
NTFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Allows TRIM operations to be sent to the storage device)
ReFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Allows TRIM operations to be sent to the storage device)

> (*) FWIW, on Windows 11, this is even split into two values for NTFS
>     and ReFS separately.

...and on W10 as well.

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -