Ubuntu
libatasmart package

  1. Bug #460030
  2. Comment #4

Comment 4 for bug 460030

Revision history for this message
In , Gioele Barabucci (gioele) 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?