Propose your solution
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
|
You mean they should FIX the drive-killer bug.
|
|
|
@Endolith
That's just the thing. There is a lot of confusion wrt whether this bug is a 'bug', what its background is and if a fix has already been implemented.
I agree with you, that if this bug hasn't been fully fixed, it should definitely be a priority for the developers (both upstream and downstream).
|
|
|
|
Totally agree, I'm waiting for this bug to get fixed before I'm buying a new notebook. I'm a bit disappointed such a critical bug hasn't been fixed properly yet.
|
|
|
|
i put ubuntu on my hp laptop are you saying it could kill the drive?!?
|
|
|
@acer5050
well then that's really good, but you have to think why there's so much back and forth talk about it actually being fixed...there's still a lot of controversy and doubt. Just take a look at some of the comments on the bug's page.
which is precisely why this idea was born.
there are lots of hardware lists out there detailing specific laptop and hard disk models that are known to be affected. Some of them include:
http://ata.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Known_issues
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DanielHahler/Bug59695
|
|
glotz
wrote on the 2 Nov 08 at 19:48
|
|
|
|
Since we're talking about a kernel question I don't see how Canonical or Dell could issue an official statement about it.
|
|
|
|
Canonical or Dell could easily issue an official statement because this is a bug that affects systems they are involved in distributing. This is not a matter of fixing the bug - although that is also important; this is a matter of Canonical having an explicit, clear explanation and position on the problem that people can post links to in forums, or find on their own, to get the real scoop. The point here is to clear up the uncertainty and confusion about the current state of the problem. (In my experience, this sort uncertainty and confusion is one reason why many people prefer to stick with tried-and-true proprietary software, even when that software is drastically lower quality.)
|
|
|
@hunt.topher
thanks for agreeing with me on this!
|
|
|
lol i was actually surprised they marked the idea as implemented. But i still have issues with my hdd =(
Dell XPS M1530
Please dont mark ideas/bugs as implemented if they aren't, thats the same as lying.
|
|
|
|
I have a compaq hp 6820s it is on that list how do I know if its affecting me and how can I solve it? I'm new to linux
|
|
|
@acer5050
please check the bug description to help diagnose the problem. basically you need to install the smartmontools package and then do 'sudo smartctl -A /dev/sd*' where * is your disk number. Then calculate Load_Cycle_Count/Power_On_Hours based on the numbers listed in the RAW_VALUE column. Ideally "there should be fewer than ~15 load cycles per hour, except during heavy usage while on battery" .
As for a fix to the issue, there still is a lot of confusion and controversy.
|
|
|
193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 2293
|
|
|
193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 2293
|
|
|
I just bought a new drive for my computer a month ago and after seeing this page I decided to checkout the SMART data on my drive.....
193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 092 092 000 Old_age Always - 16709
That seems a bit excessive. I can hear it happen every 30 seconds now that I'm listening for it. I hope my new drive is up to snuff or it seems like I'll be in the market for drives again real soon.
I don't know enough about the issue to have an opinion but it should certainly be dealt with in the proper manner which I assume is being done at the moment.
|
|
|
|
whats the result with windows in the same computer
|
|
|
There is a lot of confusion wrt whether this bug is a 'bug'
No there isn't.
If installing Ubuntu on your computer prematurely kills your hard drive, then it is a bug and it needs to be fixed ASAP.
Trying to pin the blame on someone else doesn't solve the problem. It's Ubuntu Brainstorm, not Blamestorm.
|
|
|
why speculate? why don't we let Canonical and Dell let us know the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?! we CAN handle the truth! :D
cast your votes of support please :)
|
|
|
|
I think my drive died last night. Awesome.
|
|
|
@Endolith
That just sucks :( .
|
|
|
Mark Shuttleworth responded to a question from somebody who obviously was aware of this idea on the #ubuntu-classroom IRC channel on Freenode today. [jcastro aka Jorge Castro was moderator. sabdfl is aka Shuttleworth. Pasting the transcript here for commentators:
--
15:39 jcastro QUESTION: Does Canonical ever make "Official Policy Announcements" on contentious issues? Two recent controversies were the hard drive wear issue and the issue with the Intel network cards being bricked. Are there official guidelines on what should be done when Ubuntu can possibly damage hardware?
15:40 sabdfl yes, we have a process for handling emergencies and screwups
15:40 sabdfl including making sure that we communicate clearly about what the situation is
15:40 sabdfl unfortunately we have that because there have been emergencies, and we have in the past occasionally screwed up
15:40 sabdfl but i think the policies are good
15:41 sabdfl i don't think such an issue is contentious - if we make a mistake, we need to sort it out, and keep people briefed
--
I think we should be pretty optimistic about hearing an official statement soon! wuhoo! :)
PS: couple of other hardware compatibility questions were relevant too such as:
--
16:25 jcastro QUESTION: The hardware database mentioned earlier seems limited to certifying whole machines. It seems like it would be more useful for most of us if we had a listing of individual hardware products that were known to work (or not work), particularly video and wireless cards...
16:25 jcastro QUESTION: .. Yet few wireless vendors would see the point in submitting their hardware for certification unless there were already a database to be added to. Is there a plan to get that sort of certification?
16:25 sabdfl i think jcastro pointed to the hardware database earlier
16:26 sabdfl we try to aggregate the information folks send us about their hardware
16:26 sabdfl it's difficult to do component-level certification
16:26 sabdfl because often, something breaks at the system level
16:26 sabdfl we do work with component manufacturers, though, if there is a machine that needs to be enabled
--
I had missed the earlier questions, so asked this crucial question just in case:
--
6:55 jcastro QUESTION: how robust is the laptop certification process between Canonical and its partners? should customers expect 0% system breakage (in terms of hardware or software)?
16:56 sabdfl they should expect it, and we strive to deliver it
16:56 sabdfl see above for how we handle emergencies and screwups :-)
--
cheers everybody! #ubuntu-classroom is a great place to hang out! :D
|
|
|
Hmmm... I had woken up to an unresponsive black screen with a mouse pointer and nothing else, which then listed a bunch of gibberish about I/O errors on the Ctrl+Alt+F1 screen, but now after reboot and fsck it's working again. Probably the first signs of failure, though, right? What kind of symptoms would the head parking problem cause?
@AndrewLuecke:
It is, but its with poor harddisk/hardware design.
If a piece of software doesn't work on certain hardware, then it's a bug with the software. Stop trying to shift the blame. Sure, hardware can have poor design decisions, but that's no excuse for letting problems like this go unfixed. If it can be made to work correctly, and it doesn't, then it's a bug.
Open source software has faults, too, and we need to take responsibility and fix them, not get caught up in pride or risk damaging users' computers for the sake of saving face. If you want to deny problems and spread misinformation, work for Microsoft.
As I have pointed out, the people here with the problem still haven't tested it in vista.. They just assume.
I was getting few to none load cycles per hour in Windows XP (I measured 0.75 per hour), and 200+ per hour in Ubuntu.
Of course, I didn't become aware of this problem until after I'd racked up over 1 million load cycles, because people were too busy telling me there's nothing to worry about to actually fix it. It still hasn't been fixed, despite the status of the bug report.
I'm glad to see Mark's response. Please fix the problem, and if you're not going to, post an official statement explaining why.
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke:
When i had windows xp (dual boot). I heared it clicking 2 times a minute or so. So on windows xp the same problem.
My laptop is built for Windows vista, and it had vista installed as the default OS. I dont know if the problem is the same in vista cause i didnt use it =/
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 12 Nov 08 at 15:23
|
|
|
Al-Sahhaf, is that you?
Did you also propose that the FDIV bug was just mass hysteria and that there's no reason to write a workaround for it?
If software physically damages hardware, then the software needs to be fixed.
Swearing and screaming and blaming everyone else just makes you look bad, while the users suffer.
|
|
|
Sorry i forgot to mention:
I use Ubuntu 8.10 and obviously the problem does exist. I also tried using openSUSE and my load cycle count hardly increased whilst using it for an hour ( i have no idea why). Also my LCC does increase quite a fair bit in windows vista too just not as much as ubuntu.
|
|
|
Hi Andrew,
I have just called them back and explained the update didnt work after around 30minutes of him fumbling about he found something on his system saying that some laptop manufacturers that use WD hard drives come with Reduced Power Spinup Jumper setting enabled. He also said this can cause strange head parking problems. I will have to call them back later as i do not have my laptop at work with me. I will check all Jumper settings as well as trying to update the drive with different jumper settings to see if this fixes or makes this situation better.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 20 Nov 08 at 01:03
|
|
|
'I keep seeing people say "it's the hard drive (manufacturers) fault." No it's not. You don't ask a hard drive to go into ultra low power mode if you are planning on coming back to it in just a few seconds. Ubuntu needs to pull it's head out of it's backside and stop and think about how often it hits the drive after it suggests to the drive that it's not going to be used with any frequency.'
|
|
|
|
UPDATE: As of 21 November 2008 1239 UTC, the status of this bug has been changed from "Fix Released" to "In Progress" on its tracker at Launchpad.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 24 Nov 08 at 20:18
|
|
|
No one cares if it's the hard drive manufacturer's fault. Which part of this don't you understand?
They care that their hard drives are dying while using Ubuntu and not in any other OS, including other Linux distros.
Ubuntu needs to take responsibility and work around the problem, instead of trying to pin the blame on everyone else.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 18 Jan 09 at 18:18
|
|
|
|
This has mostly been fixed by the Ubuntu developers, though some are still reporting trouble.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 18 Jan 09 at 18:18
|
|
|
|
By which I mean the fundamental bug has been fixed, not the official statement. An official statement would be nice, but I doubt we'll ever see one.
|
ziroday
(Brainstorm moderator)
wrote on the 20 Jan 09 at 12:19
|
|
|
|
This thread has gotten out of hand. The bug has been diagnosed, its a hardware issue. A patch has been written to workaround the hardware. If you are still having high load counts contact your hard drive manufacturer.
|
Post your comment
|
Blueprint handlingtooagressivepowermanagment:
Ubuntuforums.org thread #941864
