From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59605C3A5A2 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328132077B for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729056AbfICPnh (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 11:43:37 -0400 Received: from dsl092-148-226.wdc2.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.92.148.226]:50153 "EHLO nathanst.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728679AbfICPnh (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 11:43:37 -0400 Received: from holmes.nathanst.com (nathanst@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nathanst.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3sarge3) with ESMTP id x83FhXo0032695 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 11:43:33 -0400 Received: (from nathanst@localhost) by holmes.nathanst.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id x83FhX6p032693 for linux-usb@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 11:43:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 11:43:33 -0400 From: Nathan Stratton Treadway To: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Adding "UAS" protocol line to usb.ids file? Message-ID: <20190903154333.GT4337@nathanst.com> References: <20190817220145.GJ1403@nathanst.com> <20190903133933.GA9435@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190903133933.GA9435@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-usb-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 15:39:33 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 06:01:45PM -0400, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote: > > I noticed that when I use "lsusb -v" on a UAS-enabled drive enclosure, > > the bInterfaceProtocol line for #80/0x50 has a "protocol name" label but the > > one for #98/0x62 does not: [...] > > So...I was wondering if there was any particular reason that protocol > > 98 isn't included in the usb.ids file? > > No one got around to it? Feel free to submit a patch to the web site > that handles these to upate it. Thanks for your reply. I did look there first, but because the "Bulk-Only" and "UAS" protocol names seem so similar but the UAS name hasn't been created for several years now, I started to wonder if there was a more complicated background story behind the situation. Anyway, for what it's worth there was a submission for the UAS protocal name on the USB ID website in 2013 and I submitted another one a couple weeks ago, but so far both are still showing up as grey (which seems to indicate that it's still pending approval by "an admin"). https://usb-ids.gowdy.us/read/UC/08/06/62 I'll see if I can track down contact information for the admin(s) there. Nathan