On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 12:13:06AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > (As a historical oddity - there _was_ this bug in some drive that would > > corrupt the firmware by mistake, though - I think we _did_ actually fry > > some drives by sending it a "cache flush" command that it wasn't > > expecting, and that it turned into firmware reload thing or something. I > > think Alan Cox knows all the gruesome details, but that we could > > definitely blame on bad hardware.. > > since you asked for it... > > a certain distribution shipped a preproduction version of a packet > writing patch or it was some barrier thing, I forgot, which would end up > sending an *ATA* "cache flush" command to ATAPI drives that didn't claim > to understand that command range. A certain model of cdrom drive (LG?) > actually had that same command byte code as "flash firmware". > > Arguably it's a very stupid value to pick, but it's also not technically > a drive bug; the drive explicitly claimed to not understand the command > set in question, and that distro kernel sent it anyway. Actually, the standard does prohibit these command values from being reused for different purposes. http://lwn.net/Articles/55815/ - : 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
