On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 12:52:52AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'll apologize in advance for posting this to both users and devel, but it > didn't get much attention on the users list. > > I have a Casio 2000ux camera that worked fine under linux through 2.4.22: > > Jan 28 00:44:54 localhost kernel: Vendor: Casio Model: QV DigitalCamera Rev: > 9009 > Jan 28 00:44:54 localhost kernel: Type: Direct-Access ANSI > SCSI revision: 02 > Jan 28 00:44:54 localhost kernel: Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id > 0, lun 0, type 0 > > By 2.4.23 it stopped working in a most unfriendly manner, spewing more > nonsense than dmesg could report. A sampling from /var/log/messages: > > Jan 16 22:24:43 localhost kernel: sda : READ CAPACITY failed. > Jan 16 22:24:43 localhost kernel: sda : status=0, message=00, host=7, driver=00 > Jan 16 22:24:43 localhost kernel: sda : sense not available. > Jan 16 22:24:43 localhost kernel: sda: assuming Write Enabled > Jan 16 22:24:43 localhost kernel: sda: assuming drive cache: write through > Jan 16 22:25:55 localhost kernel: sda : READ CAPACITY failed. > Jan 16 22:25:55 localhost kernel: sda : status=0, message=00, host=7, driver=00 > Jan 16 22:25:55 localhost kernel: sda : sense not available. > Jan 16 22:25:55 localhost kernel: sda: assuming Write Enabled > Jan 16 22:25:55 localhost kernel: sda: assuming drive cache: write through > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: usb 1-1: USB disconnect, address 2 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda : READ CAPACITY failed. > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda : status=0, message=00, host=1, driver=00 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda : sense not available. > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda: assuming Write Enabled > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda: assuming drive cache: write through > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda:<3>scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sda, logical block 0 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sda, logical block 0 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: unable to read partition table > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: sda:<3>scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sda, logical block 0 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: unable to read partition table > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: scsi0 (0:0): rejecting I/O to dead device > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: Attached scsi removable disk sda at scsi0, channel > 0, id 0, lun 0 > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: kernel BUG at drivers/usb/storage/usb.c:848! > Jan 16 22:26:11 localhost kernel: invalid operand: 0000 [#1] > > The problem seems clear enough; here is the unusual_devs.h entry from > 2.4.22: > > /* Casio QV 2x00/3x00/4000/8000 digital still cameras are not conformant > * to the USB storage specification in two ways: > * - They tell us they are using transport protocol CBI. In reality they > * are using transport protocol CB. > * - They don't like the INQUIRY command. So we must handle this command > * of the SCSI layer ourselves. > */ > UNUSUAL_DEV( 0x07cf, 0x1001, 0x1000, 0x9009, > "Casio", > "QV DigitalCamera", > US_SC_8070, US_PR_CB, NULL, > US_FL_FIX_INQUIRY ), > > and from 2.4.23 and beyond (up to 2.6.2-rc2): > > UNUSUAL_DEV( 0x07cf, 0x1001, 0x1000, 0x9999, > "Casio", > "QV DigitalCamera", > US_SC_DEVICE, US_PR_DEVICE, NULL, > US_FL_FIX_INQUIRY ), > > There are 3 differences, but the key one seems to be replacing > US_PR_CB with US_PR_DEVICE, given that the comment states that the > camera lies about the transport protocol. I replaced the entry in > 2.6.2-rc2 with the older version and the camera again works fine. I > know this has been discussed here in the past; I gather from the > archives that newer Casio cameras don't have this problem and perhaps > nobody else is still using the old cameras (hence the lack of outrage > after the change). Still, I think this entry should be at least > partially reverted or a new entry added for the older cameras.
How about 2 entries. One for devices 0x1000 to 0x9009 and one for 0x9010 to 0x9999 ? Care to make up a patch for this? thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
