On Nov 11 Stefan Richter wrote:
On Nov 09 Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
I recommend broadening this patch. T10 is discussing making READ (10),
WRITE (10), etc. obsolete in SBC-4 in favor of their 16-byte CDB
counterparts.
The algorithm should be:
1. During discovery,
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 16:33 +, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
wrote:
I recommend broadening this patch. T10 is discussing making READ
(10), WRITE (10), etc. obsolete in SBC-4 in favor of their 16-byte CDB
counterparts.
The algorithm should be:
1. During discovery, determine if
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 11:08 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
index 13b8bcd..6ff785e 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
@@ -251,6 +251,11 @@ static int slave_configure(struct
Il 12/11/2012 12:33, James Bottomley ha scritto:
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 11:08 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
index 13b8bcd..6ff785e 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
@@
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 12/11/2012 12:33, James Bottomley ha scritto:
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 11:08 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
index 13b8bcd..6ff785e 100644
---
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 15:31 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 12/11/2012 12:33, James Bottomley ha scritto:
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 11:08 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
b/drivers/usb/storage/scsiglue.c
index 13b8bcd..6ff785e 100644
---
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:10 AM, James Bottomley
james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com wrote:
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 15:31 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 12/11/2012 12:33, James Bottomley ha scritto:
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 11:08 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
diff --git
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 10:01 -0500, Jason J. Herne wrote:
Any reason not to do this always on 2TB drives, which basically means
changing this:
- } else if (block 0x) {
+ } else if (sdkp-capacity 0x) {
and nothing else?
This was the intent of my patch,
Il 12/11/2012 16:10, James Bottomley ha scritto:
Actually it only turns it on for large capacity drives, as said in the
comment. sdp-force_read_16 only matters for 2TB drives:
If you follow the discussion, we'll need to turn it on for some drives
regardless of size.
Even if the two
On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 12/11/2012 16:10, James Bottomley ha scritto:
Actually it only turns it on for large capacity drives, as said in the
comment. sdp-force_read_16 only matters for 2TB drives:
If you follow the discussion, we'll need to turn it on for some
On Nov 09 Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
I recommend broadening this patch. T10 is discussing making READ (10), WRITE
(10), etc. obsolete in SBC-4 in favor of their 16-byte CDB counterparts.
The algorithm should be:
1. During discovery, determine if 16-byte CDBs are supported.
From: Jason J. Herne hern...@gmail.com
Force large capacity ( 2TB) drives in USB enclosures to use READ(16) instead
of READ(10). Some(most/all?) enclosures do not like READ(10) commands when a
large capacity drive is installed.
Signed-off-by: Jason J. Herne hern...@gmail.com
---
-scsi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-scsi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jason J. Herne
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 9:08 AM
To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org; st...@rowland.harvard.edu; Jason J. Herne
Subject: [PATCH] USB enclosures seem to require read(16
13 matches
Mail list logo
