* Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] scsi: scsi_devinfo: extend BLIST_NO_LUN_1F to MATSHITA and NEC PD-1 variants [not found] ` <c1db6016-9b7d-454b-a4a8-c8f61391c5ae@suse.de> @ 2026-05-06 0:52 ` Phil Pemberton 2026-05-08 6:02 ` Hannes Reinecke 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Phil Pemberton @ 2026-05-06 0:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hannes Reinecke, linux-ide, linux-scsi Cc: linux-kernel, Damien Le Moal, Niklas Cassel, James E . J . Bottomley, Martin K . Petersen On 27/04/2026 12:56, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 4/26/26 21:09, Phil Pemberton wrote: >> The Panasonic LF-1095/LF-1195 PD/CD combo drive was sold under three >> OEM identities: COMPAQ "PD-1", MATSHITA "PD-1", and NEC "PD-1 ODX654P". >> All three are the same drive mechanism with the same firmware family, >> so they should share the BLIST_NO_LUN_1F quirk that was applied to the >> COMPAQ variant: PDT 0x1f / PQ 0 INQUIRY responses on non-existent LUNs >> are treated as "LUN not present" rather than as a phantom sdev. >> >> This patch is offered for completeness. It has not been tested on the >> MATSHITA or NEC variants -- the author only has access to the COMPAQ >> unit -- but the drives are functionally identical and the flag is a >> no-op on devices that do not exhibit the PDT 0x1f response. Drop or >> hold this patch if confirmation on real hardware is preferred before >> extending the quirk. >> >> Signed-off-by: Phil Pemberton <philpem@philpem.me.uk> >> --- >> drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c | 6 ++++-- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >> index bfc2cbd43897..ab1ffa9433b7 100644 >> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >> @@ -201,7 +201,8 @@ static struct { >> {"LASOUND", "CDX7405", "3.10", BLIST_MAX5LUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> {"Marvell", "Console", NULL, BLIST_SKIP_VPD_PAGES}, >> {"Marvell", "91xx Config", "1.01", BLIST_SKIP_VPD_PAGES}, >> - {"MATSHITA", "PD-1", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> + {"MATSHITA", "PD-1", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN | >> + BLIST_NO_LUN_1F}, >> {"MATSHITA", "DMC-LC5", NULL, BLIST_NOT_LOCKABLE | >> BLIST_INQUIRY_36}, >> {"MATSHITA", "DMC-LC40", NULL, BLIST_NOT_LOCKABLE | >> BLIST_INQUIRY_36}, >> {"Medion", "Flash XL MMC/SD", "2.6D", BLIST_FORCELUN}, >> @@ -212,7 +213,8 @@ static struct { >> {"nCipher", "Fastness Crypto", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN}, >> {"NAKAMICH", "MJ-4.8S", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> {"NAKAMICH", "MJ-5.16S", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> - {"NEC", "PD-1 ODX654P", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> + {"NEC", "PD-1 ODX654P", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN | >> + BLIST_NO_LUN_1F}, >> {"NEC", "iStorage", NULL, BLIST_REPORTLUN2}, >> {"NRC", "MBR-7", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> {"NRC", "MBR-7.4", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, > > Any specific reason why this patch is not merged with the previous one? > Otherwise: > > Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> Only that these are optional to the feature work and untested as I don't have hardware. I believe these drives use the same PD-1 mechanism and firmware so should behave the same, but I can't prove it. The intent was to allow the 1-6 set to be merged (as these are tested) without 7/7 (which is not) to minimise the risk of regressions. Thanks, -- Phil. philpem@philpem.me.uk https://www.philpem.me.uk/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] scsi: scsi_devinfo: extend BLIST_NO_LUN_1F to MATSHITA and NEC PD-1 variants 2026-05-06 0:52 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] scsi: scsi_devinfo: extend BLIST_NO_LUN_1F to MATSHITA and NEC PD-1 variants Phil Pemberton @ 2026-05-08 6:02 ` Hannes Reinecke 2026-05-11 21:54 ` Damien Le Moal 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Hannes Reinecke @ 2026-05-08 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phil Pemberton, linux-ide, linux-scsi Cc: linux-kernel, Damien Le Moal, Niklas Cassel, James E . J . Bottomley, Martin K . Petersen On 5/6/26 02:52, Phil Pemberton wrote: > On 27/04/2026 12:56, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> On 4/26/26 21:09, Phil Pemberton wrote: >>> The Panasonic LF-1095/LF-1195 PD/CD combo drive was sold under three >>> OEM identities: COMPAQ "PD-1", MATSHITA "PD-1", and NEC "PD-1 ODX654P". >>> All three are the same drive mechanism with the same firmware family, >>> so they should share the BLIST_NO_LUN_1F quirk that was applied to the >>> COMPAQ variant: PDT 0x1f / PQ 0 INQUIRY responses on non-existent LUNs >>> are treated as "LUN not present" rather than as a phantom sdev. >>> >>> This patch is offered for completeness. It has not been tested on the >>> MATSHITA or NEC variants -- the author only has access to the COMPAQ >>> unit -- but the drives are functionally identical and the flag is a >>> no-op on devices that do not exhibit the PDT 0x1f response. Drop or >>> hold this patch if confirmation on real hardware is preferred before >>> extending the quirk. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Phil Pemberton <philpem@philpem.me.uk> >>> --- >>> drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c | 6 ++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >>> index bfc2cbd43897..ab1ffa9433b7 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_devinfo.c >>> @@ -201,7 +201,8 @@ static struct { >>> {"LASOUND", "CDX7405", "3.10", BLIST_MAX5LUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> {"Marvell", "Console", NULL, BLIST_SKIP_VPD_PAGES}, >>> {"Marvell", "91xx Config", "1.01", BLIST_SKIP_VPD_PAGES}, >>> - {"MATSHITA", "PD-1", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> + {"MATSHITA", "PD-1", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN | >>> + BLIST_NO_LUN_1F}, >>> {"MATSHITA", "DMC-LC5", NULL, BLIST_NOT_LOCKABLE | >>> BLIST_INQUIRY_36}, >>> {"MATSHITA", "DMC-LC40", NULL, BLIST_NOT_LOCKABLE | >>> BLIST_INQUIRY_36}, >>> {"Medion", "Flash XL MMC/SD", "2.6D", BLIST_FORCELUN}, >>> @@ -212,7 +213,8 @@ static struct { >>> {"nCipher", "Fastness Crypto", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN}, >>> {"NAKAMICH", "MJ-4.8S", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> {"NAKAMICH", "MJ-5.16S", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> - {"NEC", "PD-1 ODX654P", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> + {"NEC", "PD-1 ODX654P", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN | >>> + BLIST_NO_LUN_1F}, >>> {"NEC", "iStorage", NULL, BLIST_REPORTLUN2}, >>> {"NRC", "MBR-7", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >>> {"NRC", "MBR-7.4", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN}, >> >> Any specific reason why this patch is not merged with the previous one? >> Otherwise: >> >> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> > > Only that these are optional to the feature work and untested as I don't > have hardware. I believe these drives use the same PD-1 mechanism and > firmware so should behave the same, but I can't prove it. > > The intent was to allow the 1-6 set to be merged (as these are tested) > without 7/7 (which is not) to minimise the risk of regressions. > So drop it, then. We can always add it later once someone shows up who actually has the hardware. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] scsi: scsi_devinfo: extend BLIST_NO_LUN_1F to MATSHITA and NEC PD-1 variants 2026-05-08 6:02 ` Hannes Reinecke @ 2026-05-11 21:54 ` Damien Le Moal 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Damien Le Moal @ 2026-05-11 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hannes Reinecke, Phil Pemberton, linux-ide, linux-scsi Cc: linux-kernel, Niklas Cassel, James E . J . Bottomley, Martin K . Petersen On 5/8/26 15:02, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> Only that these are optional to the feature work and untested as I don't >> have hardware. I believe these drives use the same PD-1 mechanism and >> firmware so should behave the same, but I can't prove it. >> >> The intent was to allow the 1-6 set to be merged (as these are tested) >> without 7/7 (which is not) to minimise the risk of regressions. >> > So drop it, then. > We can always add it later once someone shows up who actually has the > hardware. I agreee, let's drop this one and patch only once it can be confirmed that the change is needed. -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-11 21:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20260426190920.2051289-1-philpem@philpem.me.uk>
[not found] ` <20260426190920.2051289-8-philpem@philpem.me.uk>
[not found] ` <c1db6016-9b7d-454b-a4a8-c8f61391c5ae@suse.de>
2026-05-06 0:52 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] scsi: scsi_devinfo: extend BLIST_NO_LUN_1F to MATSHITA and NEC PD-1 variants Phil Pemberton
2026-05-08 6:02 ` Hannes Reinecke
2026-05-11 21:54 ` Damien Le Moal
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox