Post AAWb7wWUtuVoV9CyW0 by nihl@p.umbriel.fr
(DIR) More posts by nihl@p.umbriel.fr
(DIR) Post #AAWZYEkXYeBgePBeLI by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:12:51Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
So the HDDs for the NAS arrived :blobcatreach:They are HUA723030ALA640,supposedly 3TB.Unpacked one of them and it turns out my NAS sees it as 2TB, or around 1.8TiB.The only other thing with enough power for a 3.5" drive I have nearby is an old Pentium 4, which sees a similar size (haven't checked if exactly equal).Both are 32-bit CPUs with pretty old SATA controllers... but if this was a controller limitation, it'd be power-of-2, not power-of-10, right?
(DIR) Post #AAWZlKmORy977IIaxs by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:15:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Now, this HDD also has a 2TB version - HUA7230*2*0ALA640 (emphasis mine).But the label on the HDD I have clearly says HUA7230*3*0ALA640, and so does smartctl and sysfs...could it be mislabeled that badly?
(DIR) Post #AAWZsLezZfh9sJBKK0 by pony@blovice.bahnhof.cz
2021-08-20T18:16:30.596340Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl could it be wrong firmware?
(DIR) Post #AAWZw6fPGFTGX4ARoe by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:17:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@pony hmm... smart reports model of 3TB version but the same size as lsblk... maybe it is wrong firmware...
(DIR) Post #AAWZzkKIGSrsP21mHg by nat@ferrus.net
2021-08-20T18:17:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl There's definitely some architecture limits for disks at 2TB. Are these devices booting via BIOS rather than UEFI?
(DIR) Post #AAWa4kSrB7ukHMPzfc by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:18:45Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@pony though I have a drive of the same model in a server at the uni, it has the same firmware as the one here, but 3TB size...
(DIR) Post #AAWa69afFKqyUljxQ0 by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:19:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nat I'm booting via u-boot on armv5tel...
(DIR) Post #AAWaGXikNvyMEKTVQW by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:20:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nat also, kernel 4.4, CONFIG_LBDAF=y (at least according to the sources, because whoever build this NAS's firmware wasn't smart enough to enable /proc/config.gz...)
(DIR) Post #AAWaashc5LKV5yduEK by nihl@p.umbriel.fr
2021-08-20T18:17:01.335790Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl Weird. I guess you bought them from a reputable vendor or you wouldn't really ask yourself that, but I've never seen hard drives with the wrong label and the wrong ID reported by the controller.
(DIR) Post #AAWaaxot3j7Qxz5HlI by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:24:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nihl I bought them from a repair shop that had some unused ones (0 hours according to smartctl) laying on shelves since 2012...they were still in antistatic foil, not sure how likely it is for a repair shop to have an machine for antistatic foil packaging... I guess not that unlikely...anyway, if I can confirm that they're not 2TB I'll RMA them, but I don't have a 64-bit machine with a 12V SATA power connector...
(DIR) Post #AAWb7wWUtuVoV9CyW0 by nihl@p.umbriel.fr
2021-08-20T18:27:05.651397Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl I wouldn't expect that sort of shop to have made 3TB labels nor flashed 2TB drives, so unless they bought counterfeit ones and were quite unlucky (and that's not very likely) I'd tend to think there's a software limitation there. I've got no idea if it should be a power of 2 though, there might be something to dig there.
(DIR) Post #AAWb7x1L3FBM2ndbaS by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:30:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nihl I'm trying the second drive right now, will see if it shows up the same.Also, I bought one HDD of the same model from that shop before, it's in a server at my uni and shows up as 3TB there, but same model, same firmware version.
(DIR) Post #AAWbR0iPXSMj0NsBBg by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:33:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nihl the other drive shows up as 3TB, 2.7TiB.Same model, same fw rev.
(DIR) Post #AAWbcu3U7u8RpAOurA by nihl@p.umbriel.fr
2021-08-20T18:34:14.332152Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl Huh, that's even weirder. I'd say that's better than not being able to use >2TB in your NAS but it's still a mystery. If the repair shop folks are nice enough, talking to them about it is probably the best thing to do, though without diving into this thing's internals they're probably going to be as clueless as I am right now.
(DIR) Post #AAWbcuTiYN7R8WfrkG by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T18:36:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nihl yeah but they gave 12mo warranty or sth, like a good repair shop :P
(DIR) Post #AAWeCiOf9KEg02VjRQ by nat@ferrus.net
2021-08-20T19:04:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl If some old BIOS machines had a limit at 2TB, it seems reasonable that old 32-bit ARM devices could too. Track down a more recent machine to test in? Put stickers on the drives and write "2TB" on them in crayon?
(DIR) Post #AAWeQF7IoBrtF9qDMe by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T19:07:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nat I have 3 of those disks and it turned out only the 1st one appears as 2TB, the other two show up as 3TB. So it's definitely not the NAS's limitation, just one buggy drive. I'm gonna RMA it probably.
(DIR) Post #AAWeUWmF5d4hAs29T6 by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T19:08:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Ok, turns out the other 2 disks are properly detected as 3TB, so there must be sth wrong with the first one, either it's mislabeled, or has wrong firmware, or sth. Guess I'll RMA it...
(DIR) Post #AAWexMBXY87Aioc5Uu by nat@ferrus.net
2021-08-20T19:13:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl Ahh, if you have 3 of them and only one of them's wrong then you should sell it on ebay as a rare collectable misprint.
(DIR) Post #AAWf3zALX6MvM8DRCK by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2021-08-20T19:14:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nat lol no, the third was supposed to be for my brother to store games on