On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 11:59 -0800, Timothy Thelin wrote: > Irconically that was one of the solutions I was investigating > first. Here is the usb mailing list discussion on it: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=112672009700004&r=1&w=2 OK, I think the assertion that just passing through the level as scsi0 "won't work" is wrong. Most of our checks for SCSI-2 are if (xxx->scsi_level <= SCSI_2) which catches scsi0 as well as scsi2. The length of commands is actually separately settable in slave_configure, but by default we use 10 byte commands even for scsi2. > In summary, the idea of making the scsi stack "level 0 aware" was > suggested and rejected because usb devs want to keep promoting > the devices to level 2 for various reaons. At the end of it > they suggested using SG_FLAG_LUN_INHIBIT so that the usb device > could stay level 2 yet vendor specific commands could get passed > through un-touched. Neither of us knew that flag didn't work > anymore, and after I wasn't able to get it to work, that > other conversation I posted previously occured to figure out > what was going on with SG_FLAG_LUN_INHIBIT. Well ... before embarking on a massive programme to put this flag back (or implement a "I say SCSI2 but I'm really not" blacklist flag), I'd like proof that just passing SCSI_UNKNOWN as the level really won't work (and is unfixable). I think it will turn out to be the simplest course of action. James - : 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
