On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 06:38:54PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Yeah, many vendors stick to reporting compliance with really old > revisions to prevent legacy operating systems from blowing up. That sounds like a heuristic ... :-) > However, the SCSI folks are vehemently against having heuristics in the > first place (guess how many USB-ATA bridge vendors actively participate > in T10). It's an odd situation where 99.9% of the marketshare don't participate in the standards committee. > T10's official policy is that the device can fail any command > with any (valid) arguments at any time. And that the OS stack should > always retry with less data, try a different command variant, etc. That > might be another good topic for discussion, actually. Because while we > do have some hacks in place (use_10, etc.) things will soon get more > complex. I'd love to live in their world where the device won't fall over and refuse to respond to any further commands without a power cycle. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
