Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Confirms Data Corruption Bug, Halts New SSDs

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the solid-state-death dept.

CWmike writes "Intel has confirmed that its new consumer-class X25-M and X18-M solid state-disk drives (SSDs) suffer from data corruption issues and said it has pulled back shipments to resellers. The X25-M (2.5-inch) and X18-M (1.8-inch) SSDs are based on a joint venture with Micron and used that company's 34-nanometer lithography technology. That process allows for a denser, higher capacity product that brings with it a lower price tag than Intel's previous offerings, which were based on 50-nanometer lithography technology. Intel says the data corruption problem occurs only if a user sets up a BIOS password on the 34-nanometer SSD, then disables or changes the password and reboots the computer. When that happens, the SSD becomes inoperable and the data on it is irretrievable. This is not the first time Intel's X25-M and X18-M SSDs have suffered from firmware bugs. The company's first generation of drives suffered from fragmentation issues resulting in performance degradation over time. Intel issued a firmware upgrade as a fix."

7 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. Ugh... summary.... by blahplusplus · · Score: 3, Informative

    "The company's first generation of drives suffered from fragmentation issues resulting in performance degradation over time."

    The performance degradation in the Intel X-25 is not because of a "firmware bug". All SSD's will suffer performance degradation whether or not their writing/wear leveling algorithms have been updated via firmware.

    1. Re:Ugh... summary.... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 4, Informative

      The X25-M's initial firmware was unusually bad; the degradation was more rapid and more severe than necessary. Thus, they issued a firmware update. The results were quite impressive. It not only reduced the perf degradation, but it seems to have made writes faster across the board.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    2. Re:Ugh... summary.... by Krizdo4 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The performance degradation in the Intel X-25 is not because of a "firmware bug".

      Bugs can cause slowdowns, too

      Though it's highly regarded, Intel's X25-M SSD had a firmware bug that adjusted the priorities of random and sequential writes, leading to a major fragmentation problem that dropped throughput dramatically. The issue was originally uncovered by PC Perspective after two months of testing. Those tests showed that write speeds dropped from 80MB/sec. to 30MB/sec. over time, and read speeds dropped from 250MB/sec. to 60MB/sec. for some large block writes.

      https://www.techworld.com.au/article/302571/ssd_performance_--_slowdown_inevitable?pp=3

      Before firmware update

      the result suggested a write speed of 30 MB/sec.

      http://pcper.com/article.php?aid=691&type=expert&pid=3

      After firmware update

      After composing myself, I did the same file copy I had tried earlier. 76 MB/sec.

      http://pcper.com/article.php?aid=691&type=expert&pid=4

      Not a firmware bug?

  2. Re:BIOS password on a disk? by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 3, Informative

    They probably meant a hard disk password. Depending on implementation, this means either disk supported full disk encryption, or a simple firmware interlock that prevents reading through the controller without the password (but could be bypassed with forensic tools that read the disk surface directly).

    --
    $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  3. Re:Test before you ship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a professional FW tester, I can say 1) firmware can be tested easier than the hardware verification the parent is talking about, and 2) Parent is confusing HW verification with firmware verification. Don't confuse HW verification with Firmware, and don't confuse Software testing with hardware verification. They are vastly different than each other, and have their own set of tools and methods (try sitting through a STAR East or STAR West seminar as a FW tester - it is a total waste of time).

    I can (and do) test firmware on buggy hardware all day long - its not an issue.

  4. What took them so long to report this? by AllynM · · Score: 4, Informative

    Welcome to 2 weeks ago:

    http://www.pcper.com/comments.php?nid=7544

    Allyn Malventano
    Storage Editor, PC Perspective

    --
    this sig was brought to you by the letter /.
  5. Re:Typical redditor by NP-Incomplete · · Score: 4, Informative
    On a chip, adding 2^256-1 and 1 may not equal 2^256 when:
    1. Your destination register is 256 bits.
    2. Your destination register is in a different clock domain.
    3. Your timing constraints are wrong.
    4. Your power grid cannot support switching 256 registers.

    Functional simulations will only catch #1.