23 | | === Why is the attributes number and meaning different on the diks? === |
24 | | |
25 | | Unlike other parts of SMART (logs, self-tests), the attributes are not |
26 | | (and never were) part of the ATA standards. Even the general attribute |
27 | | format (ID, VALUE, WORST, RAW) is removed from the standard since ATA-4 (1998). |
28 | | |
29 | | Attribute assignment and interpretation are vendor/device specific and |
30 | | undocumented in many cases. |
31 | | |
32 | | ---- |
33 | | |
| 43 | |
| 44 | ---- |
| 45 | |
| 46 | === Why is the attributes number and meaning different on the diks? === |
| 47 | |
| 48 | Unlike other parts of SMART (logs, self-tests), the attributes are not |
| 49 | (and never were) part of the ATA standards. Even the general attribute |
| 50 | format (ID, VALUE, WORST, RAW) is removed from the standard since ATA-4 (1998). |
| 51 | |
| 52 | Attribute assignment and interpretation are vendor/device specific and |
| 53 | undocumented in many cases. |
| 54 | |
| 55 | ---- |
| 56 | |
| 57 | === What details can be interpreted from {{{Raw read error rate}}}? === |
| 58 | |
| 59 | If no documentation is available, the RAW value of attribute 1 is typically useless. |
| 60 | The 48-bit field might encode several values, try {{{-v 1,hex48}}} to check. |