On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 12:43:23AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > We fail the first command to the device if the device is marked as > NOSCAN or the lun is non-0 and the device isn't marked as SCAN LUNS. > I think the first part should be moved to slave_alloc(); it's a little > weird, but supportable. The second part troubles me a little -- is the > blacklist in the midlayer good enough to handle this, or should I leave > this mechanism in? For the first make sure to return -ENXIO from ->slave_alloc, the scsi_scan code special-cases that one and doesn't print an error. For the second I don't care too much. The midlayer blacklist and if nessecary the runtime updates to it will handle such devices just fine, but following them nvram might not be a bad idea either. > The driver currently fails commands sent to the lun of the host adapter. > Is this the correct behaviour? What should the driver do? The driver will never receice a command for the host adapter (unless it allocates a scsi_device for the host adapter itself, as e.g. gdth does) - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
