Summary: | Out-of-range SMART values | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | libatasmart | Reporter: | Gioele Barabucci <gioele> |
Component: | library | Assignee: | Lennart Poettering <lennart> |
Status: | RESOLVED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Lennart Poettering <lennart> |
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | medium | CC: | zeuthen |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | Other | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
Attachments: | Result of skdump --save on my disk |
Description
Gioele Barabucci
2009-10-31 07:46:16 UTC
What's wrong with that value? Also, please attach the SMART data dump of your drive. You can generate it with 'skdump --save=foo /dev/sda' Created attachment 30862 [details]
Result of skdump --save on my disk
(In reply to comment #1) > What's wrong with that value? I, as a simple user with no knowledge of SMART, think that the read error rate cannot be 230874873 when the threshold value is 6 and the worst value 100. Also if that huge value is real, why are both that parameter and the disk reported as OK? Could the fact that I am on an amd64 system influence the reading or interpretation of that value? Nah. That field has no well-known unit or decoding, we simply show the raw unit-less value there. It's not clear if smaller or bigger is better. There's nothing wrong here. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.