From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Pat LaVarre <p.lavarre@ieee.org>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: writable mmc profiles actually are writable
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 20:22:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031006182223.GF972@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1065463946.5185.8.camel@patehci2>
On Mon, Oct 06 2003, Pat LaVarre wrote:
> > Newsgroups: mlist.linux.scsi
> > Date: 2003-09-10 16:00:27 PST
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mount -w of dvd+rw etc. in vanilla 2.6
> > From: Patrick Mansfield (patmans@us.ibm.com)
> >
> > Should sd.c and sr.c be calling set_device_ro?
> > (after adding a read only block device, or
> > changing back to read/write)?
>
> That good question stands open, I think.
>
> The following inline plain text, now revved for -test6 & posted here,
> allows modprobe to overcome such uncooperative attitudes as:
>
> $ sudo dd if=/dev/scd2 bs=2k count=1 | wc
> 1+0 records in
> 1+0 records out
> 0 0 2048
> $
> $ sudo dd of=/dev/scd2 bs=2k count=1 if=/dev/zero
> dd: opening `/dev/scd2': Read-only file system
> $
>
> Allowing dd, mkudffs, etc. are the good consequences. The evil
> consequences I do not yet know. I do notice we have achieved
> writability without extending the enumeration that `cat
> /proc/sys/dev/cdrom/info` dumps:
>
> Can write CD-R: 0
> Can write CD-RW: 0
> Can read DVD: 0
> Can write DVD-R: 0
> Can write DVD-RAM: 0
And the device isn't writable, so...?
> diff -ur linux-2.6.0-test6/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c linux/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c
> --- linux-2.6.0-test6/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c 2003-09-27 18:50:10.000000000 -0600
> +++ linux/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c 2003-10-06 11:53:41.826299728 -0600
> @@ -426,8 +426,8 @@
> if ((fp->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) && (cdi->options & CDO_USE_FFLAGS))
> ret = cdi->ops->open(cdi, 1);
> else {
> - if ((fp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) && !CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM))
> - return -EROFS;
> +// if ((fp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) && !CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM))
> +// return -EROFS;
>
> ret = open_for_data(cdi);
> }
> diff -ur linux-2.6.0-test6/drivers/scsi/sr.c linux/drivers/scsi/sr.c
> --- linux-2.6.0-test6/drivers/scsi/sr.c 2003-09-27 18:50:13.000000000 -0600
> +++ linux/drivers/scsi/sr.c 2003-10-06 11:51:59.655832000 -0600
> @@ -327,8 +327,8 @@
> }
>
> if (rq_data_dir(SCpnt->request) == WRITE) {
> - if (!cd->device->writeable)
> - return 0;
> +// if (!cd->device->writeable)
> +// return 0;
> SCpnt->cmnd[0] = WRITE_10;
> SCpnt->sc_data_direction = SCSI_DATA_WRITE;
> } else if (rq_data_dir(SCpnt->request) == READ) {
This is obviously wrong. What are you trying to do? The uniform layer
uses CDC_DVD_RAM as meaning randomly writable media, the only thing the
kernel supports out of the box. So that is what the test is for.
Honestly, I have no idea what your are trying to pull. Calling read-only
media failing to be opened read-write as "uncooperative" is confusing,
borderline amusing :). Explain yourself in clear text, thanks.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-06 18:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-22 22:55 [linux-usb-devel] Re: USB storage problems on OHCI Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 14:54 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 15:50 ` 2 KiB/block loopback found where Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 16:46 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-29 17:12 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 20:02 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 17:12 ` max GiB written per boot Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 18:12 ` writable mmc profiles actually are writable Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 18:22 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2003-10-06 18:25 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-06 19:50 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 20:38 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-06 20:58 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 22:14 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 23:56 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 5:38 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-07 6:45 ` Matthew Dharm
2003-10-07 6:48 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-07 7:00 ` Matthew Dharm
2003-10-07 7:04 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-10 20:36 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-10 21:04 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-10 21:25 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-10 22:43 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-10 23:16 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-11 0:43 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 20:46 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 21:00 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-09 23:01 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 7:00 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-06 20:10 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 20:28 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-06 20:21 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 20:33 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-06 21:00 ` max GiB written per boot Pat LaVarre
2003-10-06 23:47 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 5:57 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-07 22:12 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-10-07 22:57 ` Willem Riede
2003-10-08 1:27 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-10-08 4:34 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-10-08 6:44 ` Jens Axboe
2003-10-09 21:59 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-10 20:54 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-07 0:51 ` 2 KiB/block loopback found where Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 17:55 ` aligned /dev/scd$n reads less rare how Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 19:39 ` zip of GiB cross-platform Pat LaVarre
2003-09-29 19:50 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-09-29 19:56 ` Pat LaVarre
2003-10-24 14:41 ` aligned /dev/scd$n reads less rare how Pat LaVarre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031006182223.GF972@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.lavarre@ieee.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.