On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 15:59 -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > That is, is usb-storage forcing scsi-2 when the device tells us it is > > scsi-3 compliant, or is the hardware reporting devices are scsi-2, yet > > requiring non-LUN value in cdb[1]? > > I think we may have both. However I don't know how this Cypress chip > reports itself. A system log showing the INQUIRY data would be very > helpful. We were told in prior emails that it actually reports a level of zero (i.e. no compliance with any SCSI standard). My original proposal was just not to modify the CDB[1] for this case if we could get the INQUIRY passed through unmangled. > It's quite possible that usb-storage no longer needs to force the > scsi-level to 2. No one has recently tested what would happen without > it. Matt probably has the best selection of devices for testing... > > There is one problem we have with devices that report themselves as SCSI-3 > or SCSI-4 but hang when they receive a REPORT LUNS command. That's easily > handled by making usb-storage set the NOREPORTLUN flag. Maybe that's all > we need to do. If you could try this out, I'd be grateful. Thanks, 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
