On 02/21/2013 05:20 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:

On Feb 21, 2013, at 9:32 AM, Stone [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

This is my ouput from the badblocks
1073006628
1073006629
1073006630
1073006631
1073006632
1073006633
1073006634
1073006635
1073006636
1073006637
1073006638
1073006639

It's consistently reporting 12. This can't be LBA values if it's an 
AF disk, or you'd get multiples of 8 (8*512=4096). I actually don't 
recall off hand how to convert from ext block numbers to LBA. But dd
 wants LBA.

These are default 1k block addresses returned by badblocks.  dd does not
want LBA.  It wants block addresses, with a default block size of 512.
If you specify a different block size with bs=, you must use that scale
for seek= or skip= or count=.

I haven't read this whole thread, is there a backup? I did see more 
than one disk with non-zero current pending sector values. So in my 
opinion, I'd ATA secure erase all of these drives and start from 
scratch if you have a backup. Actually, I'd ATA Secure Erase them, 
and then do an extended SMART test to confirm. Or if they're under 
warranty, RMA them. You shouldn't have so much bad sectors on a 
disk.

No backup.

If you keep them, you need to keep an eye on them with an extended 
smart test every week or two. It sounds like there may be loose 
material bouncing around in the disks causing these bad sectors, and 
if that's true, more will go bad. And if more do show up in an 
extended smart test, and the drives are under warranty, I'd bail out 
on them. Get them replaced.

Read the whole thread.  A followup smartctl report will be useful, but
Stone's hands are full at the moment.

Phil