From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick Mansfield Subject: Re: [usb-storage] Re: [PATCH] SCSI: limit mode sense usage Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 07:16:37 -0800 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20031028071637.B8503@beaverton.ibm.com> References: <1067313069.1277.17.camel@ronald.kuetemeier.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]:25751 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263994AbTJ1PRd (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:17:33 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from stern@rowland.harvard.edu on Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 10:03:06AM -0500 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Ronald Kuetemeier , SCSI development list , USB Storage List On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 10:03:06AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > It's not clear to me what is the best way to take care of the devices that > choke on page 3F. Should we use a special flag for those devices or > should we disable it entirely? I don't know, good question. And more generally, should we add devices to the scsi_devinfo.c blacklist, and only use the dynamic addition to the black list until the new code is available? I am still looking at the logs - I don't see any logging of the actual failure, and I did not see a failure immediately after the 3f was sent. We should first try and get his device working without black listing it. -- Patrick Mansfield