On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 4:08 PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 10:20:36AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: > > > > root@iniza:~/DISK-HEALTH# LC_ALL=C badblocks -v -p 1 -s /dev/sdc -o > > badblocks-v-p-1-s_dev-sdc_$(uname -r).txt > > Checking blocks 0 to 976762583 > > Checking for bad blocks (read-only test): done > > Pass completed, 0 bad blocks found. (0/0/0 errors) > > > > root@iniza:~/DISK-HEALTH# ll > > badblocks-v-p-1-s_dev-sdc_5.11.0-11646.1-amd64-clang13-cfi.txt > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 28. Feb 19:33 > > badblocks-v-p-1-s_dev-sdc_5.11.0-11646.1-amd64-clang13-cfi.txt > > > > Unfortunately, the output-file is empty. > > Do I miss something (order of options for example)? > > Nope; the output file is a list of block numbers for which badblocks > found problems. > > > The whole single-pass badblocks run took approx. 3 hours - last I > > looked 50% was 01:26 [hh:mm]. > > On stdout (and in output-file) - no summary of the total-time. > > > > Is that possible to have: > > > > Pass completed, 0 bad blocks found. (0/0/0 errors) + <total-time_of_run> > > The output file was designed for use to be fed into mke2fs (via the -l > option) or e2fsck (via the -l or -L options). So we can't change the > format of the output file without breaking those programs. > > You will note that the output is in the badblocks standard output: > > Pass completed, 0 bad blocks found. (0/0/0 errors) > > So there should be no confusion in the mind of the person running the > badblocks program. > OK, I see. So I misunderstood the -o option. Use time or linux-perf to see the used total-time. - Sedat -
