All 3 of my laptops are also affected. The suggested fix with "hdparm -B 180" however does not work for all harddrives. On my HITACHI_DK239A-65B (old Notebook drive in my Thinkpad 600E) for example, it does exactly the opposite when the laptop was set into laptop mode - it then starts frequent harddrive access every 10 sec which are otherwise turned off when in laptop mode. I have to turn OFF S.M.A.R.T with smartctl -s off /dev/hda and then to start laptop-mode AND in order to stop all unneccessary HD access.
By the way, this is my reload_cycle number for this 9 yr old harddrive, used as my webserver:
225 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0012 100 100 050 Old_age Always - 1627390049
Lovely :-) What is this numer - billions?
Seriously: I think that marking this severe issue as "Wishlist" is inapproprate. Also, not issuing a public warning reminds me to the behaviour of a software company based in Redmond, USA and is not nice to to all Ubuntu supporters who trust Canonical and the developers. Ubuntu is not perfect, but we have nothing to hide, even if a bug like this could cause bad press.
From the Ubuntu Code of Conduct:
Be considerate. Your work will be used by other people, and you in turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you take will affect users and colleagues, and we expect you to take those consequences into account when making decisions.
All 3 of my laptops are also affected. The suggested fix with "hdparm -B 180" however does not work for all harddrives. On my HITACHI_DK239A-65B (old Notebook drive in my Thinkpad 600E) for example, it does exactly the opposite when the laptop was set into laptop mode - it then starts frequent harddrive access every 10 sec which are otherwise turned off when in laptop mode. I have to turn OFF S.M.A.R.T with smartctl -s off /dev/hda and then to start laptop-mode AND in order to stop all unneccessary HD access.
By the way, this is my reload_cycle number for this 9 yr old harddrive, used as my webserver:
225 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0012 100 100 050 Old_age Always - 1627390049
Lovely :-) What is this numer - billions?
Seriously: I think that marking this severe issue as "Wishlist" is inapproprate. Also, not issuing a public warning reminds me to the behaviour of a software company based in Redmond, USA and is not nice to to all Ubuntu supporters who trust Canonical and the developers. Ubuntu is not perfect, but we have nothing to hide, even if a bug like this could cause bad press.
From the Ubuntu Code of Conduct:
Be considerate. Your work will be used by other people, and you in turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you take will affect users and colleagues, and we expect you to take those consequences into account when making decisions.
Ty for your consideration.