From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MaIUK-0000QI-7E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB106E0458; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C1EE0458 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42AD566065 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.992 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.992 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.393, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rw3n4rQPsPAD for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2E0663FF for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1MaIU4-0005XZ-3d for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:28 +0000 Received: from adsl-69-234-204-249.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net ([69.234.204.249]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:28 +0000 Received: from w41ter by adsl-69-234-204-249.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:11:28 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: walt Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: {OT} smartctl: read failure Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:12:56 -0700 Message-ID: References: <49bf44f10908091515y5dcc5ba5xcc2fa6ed4644271f@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-69-234-204-249.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3pre) Gecko/20090809 Shredder/3.0b4pre In-Reply-To: <49bf44f10908091515y5dcc5ba5xcc2fa6ed4644271f@mail.gmail.com> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: abf73458-e906-48d5-8313-acad08241483 X-Archives-Hash: 05e29d386cdb8c26c9e04bc125c73740 On 08/09/2009 03:15 PM, Grant wrote: > I get this on my laptop's internal HDD: > > # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sda > Num Test_Description Status Remaining > LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error > # 1 Extended offline Completed: read failure 60% 12400 > 149547192 > > after some Googling, it sounds like it's bad sectors and not > necessarily cause for alarm. Does anyone have experience with this > type of error? Can you suggest other tests to run, or comment on the > severity of the error? I have a disk that seemed very flakey in the lowest 10GB or so, even when it was relatively new. I ran e2fsck with the -c and -k flags over a period of time, and now I can use all of the disk with no apparent problems. You should read the man pages for e2fsck and badblocks before doing anything, of course. I've heard that SMART in newer disks is supposed to substitute bad block automatically, but I don't seem to have any disks that new. (Informed advice is very welcome :o)