From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: SCSI testing/USB devices are amazing Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 22:43:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:45049 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753389Ab3EJCnH (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2013 22:43:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: (ronnie sahlberg's message of "Sun, 28 Apr 2013 09:19:36 -0700") Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: ronnie sahlberg Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Ronnie" == ronnie sahlberg writes: Ronnie> * please have a look at the tests and the test results I linked Ronnie> to above. I currently have quite a few tests but am happy to Ronnie> add more. Aside from issuing commands with various bits set, I'd like to see some more sanity checking. Mainly to see whether it responds correctly to the features is claims to support. I.e. do the values reported in the Block Limits VPD look sane given what we know about the device in general (SCSI level, capacity, PI supported, discard supported, etc.)? Right now you always expect RDPROTECT/WRPROTECT > 0 to fail, but they should succeed if the device is formatted with PI. FWIW, my slightly outdated document is here: https://oss.oracle.com/~mkp/docs/linux-advanced-storage.pdf -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering