Al Viro wrote:
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 09:11:08AM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
Al Viro wrote:
Speaking of sbp2 problems... Why the _hell_ are we blacklisting on
firmware revision alone? Especially with entries like "all firmware
with 2.<whatever> as version is broken"...
The firmware_revision CSR key value has so far been a good method to
guesstimate the bridge chip. I don't know a better one.
Umm... What about ->vendor_name_kv (plus firmware_revision, obviously)?
Not a single one of the devices in my collection features vendor_name_kv
in the ROM's unit directory. The vendor_name_kv in the ROM's root
directory more often reflects the vendor of the enclosure or bridge
board than the vendor of the bridge chip. (Most vendors of enclosures or
boards seem to put only their name into a firmware although they have
the opportunity for market differentiation by an own firmware full of
their very own bugs...)
I posted an improved blacklisting patch a few days ago. Among other
small cleanups, I removed skip_ms_page_8 from the Initio blacklist entry.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux1394-devel&m=114065678722190
FWIW, that puppy appears to live just fine without forcing 36byte
inquiry here...
A few older Initio based enclosures needed it. Newer don't, including
the one I have here. AFAIK the 36byte inquiry workaround does not break
anything if forced onto non-broken devices.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- --=- ==-=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
: 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
