From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Colin Subject: Magical ansi scsi revision (was Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: What is SCSI command 0xa0 ?) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:18:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20050217221803.091fd840@hebus> References: <20050214230645.22eb3b3c@hebus> <20050217165940.23cd9521@hebus> Reply-To: Samuel Colin Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from smtp6.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.25]:40672 "EHLO smtp6.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261165AbVBQVSB (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:18:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20050217165940.23cd9521@hebus> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: SCSI development list , Samuel Colin The Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:59:40 +0100 Samuel Colin wrote: > > I don't know why. Do you want to turn on usb-storage verbose debugging > > in the 2.6.8 kernel, and run it on that other machine? > > [...] > > It's hard to say, since there are so many things being changed all the > > time. But if the REPORT_LUNS command worked under 2.6.8 and failed > > under 2.6.11, it would be worthwhile to know why. > > > OK, I will do and send the debug logs asap. > > linux-usb-devel and linux-scsi (as they might be interested in the test > results for the 2.6.8 kernel) in Cc: > OK, I put the logs here : http://sjdcolin.free.fr/tmp/scsi-problem.tgz Actually the different logs are inclusive (I did not erase the previous log informations :-/ ). I made the test with 2.6.8-test (thus the 2.6.8 with debugging on) and 2.6.10-test. These kernels are Debian ones, but I don't think there are patches that would parasite the results. The results surprised me, thus I did a test with 2.6.8 on the openbrick, and actually lacie1 (the disk that caused problems). Thus I guess that my machine hanged back then because both disks were usb and debugging was turned on. Hence, any "big" test (a big copy) could cause problems related to overloading of the disk where the root mount point was located. Anyway, I have interesting results for the scsi devel list : Feb 17 21:19:09 gnondpom kernel: scsi0 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices Feb 17 21:19:09 gnondpom kernel: Vendor: WDC WD25 Model: 00JB-00FUA0 Rev: 15.0 Feb 17 21:19:09 gnondpom kernel: Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Feb 17 21:26:10 gnondpom kernel: scsi0 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices Feb 17 21:26:15 gnondpom kernel: Vendor: WDC WD25 Model: 00JB-00FUA0 Rev: 15.0 Feb 17 21:26:15 gnondpom kernel: Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 04 It means that for a 2.6.8 kernel, the revision is 02 (then no report_luns causing problems), while for a 2.6.10, the revision is 04. As I don't think the firmware of the disk upgrades itself magically depending on the running kernel, does anyone have an idea why the numbers reported are different ? I only put scsi-dev in Cc:, as nothing is really of concern for the usb-devel list (I guess). Regards, Samuel Colin