Re: Do we need to implement sr START/STOP management

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

 



On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That's a pretty poor attitude. I suspect Microsoft care. If so they
> would be transitioning away from TEST UNIT READY to REQUEST SENSE
> to monitor power conditions and the progress indication.

I was talking about media presence polling.  We used to include TUR in
the sequence and there have been some number of devices which worked
fine for a while but lock up eventually.  Windows only issues
CHECK_MEDIA_EVENT_STATUS so nobody has tested extended TUR cycles and
nobody is fixing an optical drive EOL'd six months ago either, so what
I or you think or feel doesn't matter in the end.  The most important
thing is we provide drivers which allow proper operation and, sadly,
at this point, the best way to get there is following what windows
does.  It's not like we lose any functionality that way anyway.

If windows isn't spinning down the drive, it is highly unlikely that
missing that harms anything and it's highly like there are a bunch of
devices which would go "uh... what the hell is this? I don't know
this. osidfjalekjalkgjs".  So, there simply is no point at all.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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