Re: [PATCH 5 of 8] sd: Detect non-rotational devices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Martin K. Petersen wrote:
"Matthew" == Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx> writes:

Matthew> I already did that.  The only problem is that you made me
Matthew> include the stupid:

Matthew>         if (ata_id_major_version(args->id) > 7) {

Matthew> so of course it doesn't work on any existing hardware.  How
Matthew> about applying this patch:

Maybe we could incubate your patch in the next tree for a bit and see
what breaks without the version check?

We could even be somewhat conservative like we were with RC16 in SCSI.
The SATA devices I have here with valid rotational flags all report
version 7.  I wonder if > 6 do the trick?

linux/ata.h illustrates the standard ATA rules for validating bits of IDENTIFY DEVICE.

Just checking the version was always just a simplistic hack... we are talking specifically about trusting values listed as undefined in the relevant specs. That requires more, not less, gymnastics :)

	Jeff




--
To unsubscribe from this list: 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

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux