On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Dave Jones wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 01:38:07PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > usb 1-3.1: New USB device found, idVendor=152d, idProduct=2329 > > > usb 1-3.1: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=5 > > > usb 1-3.1: Product: USB to ATA/ATAPI bridge > > > usb 1-3.1: Manufacturer: JMicron > > > usb 1-3.1: SerialNumber: DC11017369FF > > > usb-storage 1-3.1:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected > > > usb-storage 1-3.1:1.0: Quirks match for vid 152d pid 2329: 8020 > > > scsi10 : usb-storage 1-3.1:1.0 > > > usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage > > > usbcore: registered new interface driver uas > > > scsi 10:0:0:0: Direct-Access WDC WD30 EFRX-68AX9N0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 CCS > > > sd 10:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0 > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Very big device. Trying to use READ CAPACITY(16). > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] 5860533168 512-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Mode Sense: 28 00 00 00 > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] No Caching mode page found > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Assuming drive cache: write through > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Very big device. Trying to use READ CAPACITY(16). > > > sdc: sdc1 > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Very big device. Trying to use READ CAPACITY(16). > > > sd 10:0:0:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI disk > > > > > > I just bought a new USB3 enclosure, and put the same 3TB disk in and saw this instead.. > > > > > > usb 1-1: New USB device found, idVendor=174c, idProduct=5106 > > > usb 1-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=2, Product=3, SerialNumber=1 > > > usb 1-1: Product: AS2105 > > > usb 1-1: Manufacturer: ASMedia > > > usb 1-1: SerialNumber: WD-WMC1T1017369 > > > usb-storage 1-1:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected > > > usb-storage 1-1:1.0: Quirks match for vid 174c pid 5106: 800000 > > > scsi11 : usb-storage 1-1:1.0 > > > scsi 11:0:0:0: Direct-Access WDC WD30 EFRX-68AX9N0 80.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 > > > sd 11:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0 > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] 732566646 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] No Caching mode page found > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] Assuming drive cache: write through > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] 732566646 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) > > > sdc: unknown partition table > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] 732566646 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) > > > sd 11:0:0:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI disk > > the commands that get sent are the same either way. > > So can you explain why the "Trying READ CAPACITY 16" spew happens with the first > enclosure, but not the 2nd ? Depending on the information it gets from the enclosure, the kernel may decide to try either READ CAPACITY(16) or READ CAPACITY(10) first. If the drive has 2^32 sectors or more then READ CAPACITY(10) will fail, and the kernel will try again with READ CAPACITY(16) after printing out that "Trying..." line. In this case, the two enclosures do indeed send different information. It shows up in these lines: > scsi 10:0:0:0: Direct-Access WDC WD30 EFRX-68AX9N0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 CCS > scsi 11:0:0:0: Direct-Access WDC WD30 EFRX-68AX9N0 80.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 The "ANSI" value is one of the determining factors for which READ CAPACITY command to try first. If the value is > 2 then the kernel uses READ CAPACITY(16). > > > I'd rather not reformat & sync 3TB if I can avoid it. Am I screwed ? > > > > You could always try to get a different enclosure that worked better. :-) > > These things are always a crapshoot. I lost count long ago how many > broken USB2 ones I've seen. The jmicron bridge above is the first one > I've never had a single problem with. Now I get to start over with USB3. And of course, at this point USB-2 is quite mature whereas USB-3 is still on the learning curve. Maybe people on the mailing list can provide some suggestions. > > Still, even with the existing enclosure you might be able to work > > around the problem. Just rewrite the partition table, dividing all > > the starting-block and number-of-blocks values by 8. (Better keep a > > copy of the original partition table lying around, just in case!) > > > > On the other hand, I don't know if the filesystem will work after that. > > If it uses physical sector sizes to record where things are located, it > > won't work. Easy enough to try it and see, though... > > Yeah, that sounds like the opposite of a fun time. It's the best I have to offer. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
