Re: [usb-storage] [Merging ATA passthru] on integrating SMART/ATA-Security in usb-storage driver

[James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>]

On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 15:59 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > That is, is usb-storage forcing scsi-2 when the device tells us it is
> > scsi-3 compliant, or is the hardware reporting devices are scsi-2, yet
> > requiring non-LUN value in cdb[1]?
> 
> I think we may have both.  However I don't know how this Cypress chip
> reports itself.  A system log showing the INQUIRY data would be very
> helpful.

We were told in prior emails that it actually reports a level of zero
(i.e. no compliance with any SCSI standard).  My original proposal was
just not to modify the CDB[1] for this case if we could get the INQUIRY
passed through unmangled.

> It's quite possible that usb-storage no longer needs to force the 
> scsi-level to 2.  No one has recently tested what would happen without 
> it.  Matt probably has the best selection of devices for testing...
> 
> There is one problem we have with devices that report themselves as SCSI-3 
> or SCSI-4 but hang when they receive a REPORT LUNS command.  That's easily 
> handled by making usb-storage set the NOREPORTLUN flag.  Maybe that's all 
> we need to do.

If you could try this out, I'd be grateful.

Thanks,

James