From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lennert Buytenhek Subject: Re: raid6 rebuild Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 10:48:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20070405084851.GA7696@xi.wantstofly.org> References: <20070404194638.GB3712@xi.wantstofly.org> <20070405062114.GB6978@xi.wantstofly.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Gordon Henderson Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 09:15:38AM +0100, Gordon Henderson wrote: > >>>[*] probably an entirely defective batch of 14 Samsung Spinpoint > >>>500G disks > >> > >>Lets hope not... Keep checking those SMART values... > > > >Failed disk #2 still reports a SMART status of "PASSED".. > > Hmmm.. I'd be tempted to double check your hardware + kernel versions > then I think in this case it's more of a disagreement between me and the disk about whether certain levels and patterns of bad sectors are acceptable or not. dd'ing the disk to /dev/null keeps reporting new UncorrectableError sectors, which overwriting with zeroes then supposedly fixes (judging by the increasing Reallocated_Sector_Ct), but a subsequent read from the very same sectors reports the very same UncorrectableError errors again, plus new errors from other sectors. The SMART short offline tests also report "Completed: read failure". Meanwhile, the disk still feels that that its SMART status is PASSED. (FYI, these are Samsung Spinpoint T166S HD501LJ disks with serial numbers in the range S0VVJ1KP3xxxxx)