registry team mailing list archive

[Bug Watch Updater <460030@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Launchpad has imported 5 comments from the remote bug at
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24829.

If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment
will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about
Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at
https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-10-31T07:46:16+00:00 Gioele Barabucci wrote:

(I originally reported this as
«https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=600219>)

Weird values are reported for the "Read error rate" SMART parameter for
my disk Seagate Momentus ST9250315AS with firmware revision 0001SDM1.

These values are

  value: "230874873" (raw 0xf9dec20d0000)
  normalized value "119"
  worst value is "100"
  threshold value is "6"

Could these values be sanitised somehow before reporting them?

Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-disk-
utility/+bug/460030/comments/1

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-10-31T08:06:09+00:00 Lennart-poettering wrote:

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'

Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-disk-
utility/+bug/460030/comments/2

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-10-31T08:10:15+00:00 Gioele Barabucci wrote:

Created an attachment (id=30862)
Result of skdump --save on my disk

Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-disk-
utility/+bug/460030/comments/3

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-10-31T08:15:49+00:00 Gioele Barabucci wrote:

(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?

Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-disk-
utility/+bug/460030/comments/4

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-10-31T08:22:08+00:00 Lennart-poettering wrote:

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.

Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-disk-
utility/+bug/460030/comments/5


** Changed in: libatasmart
   Importance: Unknown => Medium

-- 
Palimpsest displays out-of-range SMART values
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/460030
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Registry
Administrators, which is the registrant for gnome-disk-utility.