[pve-devel] New routine get_wear_leveling_info()

[Jan-Jonas Sämann]

Hi,

upon closer inspection and more testing on different systems, I also
discovered more issues with the current implementation itself. Hence
registers can vary on model bases for some vendors, it is clearly not
the correct way to map registers. The current implementation
even interprets entirely unrelated registers on some drives.
For instance on a Corsair SSD of mine Register 233 (default) is used,
wich according to smartctl is labeled as "Sandforce_Internal"

I am currently working on a different approach wich uses attribute names
from smartmontools drivedb.h to search for the correct register. This
way we can build up on existing knowledge. In theory and after more
testing, the new method could entirely replace the current lookup
procedure.  Sadly even smartmontools does not provide a generic label
for the closest possible wearout predicting value. So we still need to
look up the next best label and let smartctl translate down to the
register address.

It doesn't make sense to me anymore to maintain the kind of qnd
vendormap like Dominik allready said.

kind regards
Jan