From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: No equivalent for ide-scsi available with the new PATA drivers? Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:17:00 -0500 Message-ID: <1185211020.3417.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <46A4D91C.3090509@redhat.com> <20070723175239.54b721f1@the-village.bc.nu> <46A4DEF3.4050106@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:54016 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757550AbXGWRRE (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:17:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46A4DEF3.4050106@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Chuck Ebbert Cc: Alan Cox , IDE/ATA development list On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 13:01 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > On 07/23/2007 12:52 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > >> People with IDE tape drives are complaining there's no ide-scsi > >> driver available anymore with the new PATA layer. Is anyone > >> working on one? > > > > It would make no sense. The libata layer is already using the SCSI > > midlayer so compliant devices should already appear with the st driver. > > > > We might need some tape detect logic, but I don't have any tape devices > > so its up to someone with a tape drive handy to help out... > > I should have posted this earlier: It looks like an error handling issue ... which command was being executed at the time the tape at ata2.01 went into the error state? I haven't looked, but it's entirely possible that it's a simple timeout issue: libata does some of its own error handling, but the tape commmands have to run with timeouts set to huge values (because it can take so long to rewind a tape or write a long block). James