From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [usb-storage] [Merging ATA passthru] on integrating SMART/ATA-Security in usb-storage driver Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 18:49:05 -0600 Message-ID: <1131238146.9430.7.camel@mulgrave> References: <1131130707.3532.45.camel@mulgrave> <20051104203004.GF12384@one-eyed-alien.net> <1131137395.3532.57.camel@mulgrave> <20051105235522.GA21733@one-eyed-alien.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat9.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.41]:32436 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932251AbVKFAtR (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:49:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20051105235522.GA21733@one-eyed-alien.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Dharm Cc: Timothy Thelin , t.schorpp@gmx.de, usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Linux SCSI list On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 15:55 -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:49:55PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > > Can you just try it with a modern kernel and see if anything still > > breaks? > > I just realized this plan has a problem... > > The reported SCSI level of a device is mostly garbage, but not always. > I've seen 0, 1, 2, 3, and 0xff all reported. HOWEVER, the reported value > seems independent of what devices have vendor-specific commands (and thus > need the CDB[1] not messed with). > > It is an interesting experiment to remove the force-to-SCSI_2 part of the > usb-storage code (on the general principal of "we shouldn't be messing with > the data passed through the driver), but it doesn't solve the original > question of needing a way to pass commands without CDB[1] getting altered. Well, that might be a problem if it weren't for the fact that this LUN_INHIBIT flag was removed in 2002. If it's taken three years to find a device that has a problem with it, I don't really think it's a particularly widespread problem. And since the device that now shows the problem is setting the level to 0, it looks like we have a potential solution that fits all known cases. Anyway, the goal should be to handle devices in a standards compliant manner first and then worry about quirk tables when that doesn't work ... we have an incredibly broad quirk infrastructure in SCSI for this. James