4 ms·

These machines are actually low-power enough that you could implement a last-gasp flush mechanism. The Mac Mini already survives 1-2 seconds without AC power (a

These machines are actually low-power enough that you could implement a last-gasp flush mechanism. The Mac Mini already survives 1-2 seconds without AC power (at least if idle). You could plausibly detect AC power being yanked and immediately power down all downstream USB/TB3 devices and the display (on iMacs), freeze all CPUs into idle, and have plenty enough reservoir cap to let NVMe issue a flush. But they aren't doing that. I tested it on the Mac Mini. It loses several seconds of fsync()ed data on hard shutdown. This does require a last-gasp indication from the PSU to the rest of the system, so if they don't have that, it's not something they could add in a firmware update.

fauigerzigerk 5y ago
>But they aren't doing that. I tested it on the Mac Mini. It loses several seconds of fsync()ed data on hard shutdown. That's unfortunate. My Mac Mini crashes every other night during sleep. I guess I'm going to have to shut it down to avoid any data corruption.
- marcan_42 5y ago
  It should be flushing the drive cache on sleep. This is mostly an issue for sudden AC power loss.
  - fauigerzigerk 5y ago
    Ah, thanks! That's good to know.
- sgt 5y ago
  Why does it crash? Mac Minis are some of the most reliable machines on the market, in my experience. Maybe a faulty unit?
  - salamandersauce 5y ago
    Shitty software? My 2018 Mac Mini would crash every single time going to sleep on the last version of Mojave. I'm not alone in this as there's huge threads on MacRumors and Apple's support forum about it. Apple's "fix" was to just update to Catalina which indeed fixes it but doesn't really help if you want to run 32 bit software. Wouldn't surprise me if they did something similar again.
  - fauigerzigerk 5y ago
    It has started crashing the night after I upgraded to macOS 12.2.0. The latest update to 12.2.1 hasn't fixed it. I'm pretty sure it's not hardware related as I had no issues before the OS upgrade. Edit: Here's the first line of the crash log (which I'm sending to Apple every time): panic(cpu 3 caller 0xfffffe0023be8be0): [data.kalloc.16]: element modified after free (off:0, val:0x0000000000000030, sz:16, ptr:0xfffffe2fffc9bb00) Looks like a use after free bug.
    - yborg 5y ago
      This is why I'm still on Catalina. I used to be in the "trail by one point release" mode on macOS, now I'm in the "trail by 2 major releases" camp.
  - david_allison 5y ago
    I get regular crashes restoring from sleep on my 2014 Mac Mini (running Monterey)
rubatuga 5y ago
I mean the ATX standard has this signal built in, so Apple could just copy it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_good_signal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_good_signal
- dale_glass 5y ago
  > The ATX specification requires that the power-good signal ("PWR_OK") go high no sooner than 100 ms after the power rails have stabilized, and remain high for 16 ms after loss of AC power, and fall (to less than 0.4 V) at least 1 ms before the power rails fall out of specification (to 95% of their nominal value). I don't think that quite works for the purpose. What you'd want is a second signal that goes low as soon as possible after loss of AC power. My reading here is that PWR_OK going low is an indication that the PSU has stopped providing good power, and the CPU must shut down immediately, or it might miscompute something due to low voltage. At this point you absolutely don't want to do any last-minute writing, you'd be risking corruption. What you need here is an early warning signal that you can react to while the PSU is still coasting on the internal capacitors.
  - fps-hero 5y ago
    Power OK signals are used to prevent latch ups in silicon due to power glitches. The signals will route to power management ICs to ensure a full reset with proper bringing up of the power rails on any power glitch.
  - jaidan 5y ago
    16ms is just longer than one AC cycle at 60Hz and less than one AC cycle at 50Hz. I would has a guess that 16ms is the physical limit for most consumer hardware (and maybe commercial computing) to detect mains loss. Of course there is industrial hardware that can detect quicker than this but it would add a LOT of cost for arguably little gain, or something that could be solved in another manner.
    - dale_glass 5y ago
      > I would has a guess that 16ms is the physical limit for most consumer hardware (and maybe commercial computing) to detect mains loss. Doubtful. 16ms is an awfully long time these days. There's no reason why you couldn't detect power loss much sooner, given a good input signal. The concept also gets used quite often, in the form of SSRs with zero crossing detection. Those are used for dimmers. The reason is likely related to the awful waveforms produced by some UPSes and inverters: https://www.christidis.info/images/blog/scope_20.png https://www.christidis.info/images/blog/scope_20.png Unlike a nice sine wave, those spend a good while hovering near zero volts, so the PSU has to be able to tolerate that. Detecting loss of power sooner in this case isn't a question of cost, it's a question of that you don't have a good signal to do the detection on to start with.

fauigerzigerk 5y ago

>But they aren't doing that. I tested it on the Mac Mini. It loses several seconds of fsync()ed data on hard shutdown. That's unfortunate. My Mac Mini crashes every other night during sleep. I guess I'm going to have to shut it down to avoid any data corruption.

marcan_42 5y ago
It should be flushing the drive cache on sleep. This is mostly an issue for sudden AC power loss.
- fauigerzigerk 5y ago
  Ah, thanks! That's good to know.
sgt 5y ago
Why does it crash? Mac Minis are some of the most reliable machines on the market, in my experience. Maybe a faulty unit?
- salamandersauce 5y ago
  Shitty software? My 2018 Mac Mini would crash every single time going to sleep on the last version of Mojave. I'm not alone in this as there's huge threads on MacRumors and Apple's support forum about it. Apple's "fix" was to just update to Catalina which indeed fixes it but doesn't really help if you want to run 32 bit software. Wouldn't surprise me if they did something similar again.
- fauigerzigerk 5y ago
  It has started crashing the night after I upgraded to macOS 12.2.0. The latest update to 12.2.1 hasn't fixed it. I'm pretty sure it's not hardware related as I had no issues before the OS upgrade. Edit: Here's the first line of the crash log (which I'm sending to Apple every time): panic(cpu 3 caller 0xfffffe0023be8be0): [data.kalloc.16]: element modified after free (off:0, val:0x0000000000000030, sz:16, ptr:0xfffffe2fffc9bb00) Looks like a use after free bug.
  - yborg 5y ago
    This is why I'm still on Catalina. I used to be in the "trail by one point release" mode on macOS, now I'm in the "trail by 2 major releases" camp.
- david_allison 5y ago
  I get regular crashes restoring from sleep on my 2014 Mac Mini (running Monterey)

rubatuga 5y ago

I mean the ATX standard has this signal built in, so Apple could just copy it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_good_signal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_good_signal

dale_glass 5y ago
> The ATX specification requires that the power-good signal ("PWR_OK") go high no sooner than 100 ms after the power rails have stabilized, and remain high for 16 ms after loss of AC power, and fall (to less than 0.4 V) at least 1 ms before the power rails fall out of specification (to 95% of their nominal value). I don't think that quite works for the purpose. What you'd want is a second signal that goes low as soon as possible after loss of AC power. My reading here is that PWR_OK going low is an indication that the PSU has stopped providing good power, and the CPU must shut down immediately, or it might miscompute something due to low voltage. At this point you absolutely don't want to do any last-minute writing, you'd be risking corruption. What you need here is an early warning signal that you can react to while the PSU is still coasting on the internal capacitors.
- fps-hero 5y ago
  Power OK signals are used to prevent latch ups in silicon due to power glitches. The signals will route to power management ICs to ensure a full reset with proper bringing up of the power rails on any power glitch.
- jaidan 5y ago
  16ms is just longer than one AC cycle at 60Hz and less than one AC cycle at 50Hz. I would has a guess that 16ms is the physical limit for most consumer hardware (and maybe commercial computing) to detect mains loss. Of course there is industrial hardware that can detect quicker than this but it would add a LOT of cost for arguably little gain, or something that could be solved in another manner.
  - dale_glass 5y ago
    > I would has a guess that 16ms is the physical limit for most consumer hardware (and maybe commercial computing) to detect mains loss. Doubtful. 16ms is an awfully long time these days. There's no reason why you couldn't detect power loss much sooner, given a good input signal. The concept also gets used quite often, in the form of SSRs with zero crossing detection. Those are used for dimmers. The reason is likely related to the awful waveforms produced by some UPSes and inverters: https://www.christidis.info/images/blog/scope_20.png https://www.christidis.info/images/blog/scope_20.png Unlike a nice sine wave, those spend a good while hovering near zero volts, so the PSU has to be able to tolerate that. Detecting loss of power sooner in this case isn't a question of cost, it's a question of that you don't have a good signal to do the detection on to start with.