From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luben Tuikov Subject: [RFC] device identification, VPD 0x83 Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 15:32:32 -0400 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3EBAB0D0.40807@rogers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com ([66.185.86.74]:22968 "EHLO fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261968AbTEHTUF (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2003 15:20:05 -0400 Received: from rogers.com ([24.102.172.157]) by fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with ESMTP id <20030508193232.XSMZ4342.fep04-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@rogers.com> for ; Thu, 8 May 2003 15:32:32 -0400 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Linux SCSI list What is the alternative to providing a device identification if the device doesn't provide one (assuming scanning from userspace)? My thoughts are that since device identification is a property of the device, it should be provided by the kernel if the device supports it (VPD 0x83 is mandatory). The reason is security and configuration. A LLDD can always filter or emulate it (depending on the bus it's using, e.g. USB Storage) if the device itself doesn't provide it. Comments? -- Luben