On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 06:14:09PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 15:36 -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > That said, James has not yet addressed my point about allowing userspace > > tools to attempt the command, if they believe they can generate it. > > Well, that's because it didn't really make sense: the same would apply > to INQUIRY which you already filter. Plus if there is a way to send the > commands that doesn't crash the device, we should likely be using it. > Although I don't think so: READ DISC INFORMATION has no parameters at > all and the only parameter for READ CAPACITY(16) is the partial medium > indicator which is pretty much never used (So I'd be really surprised if > any USB devices understood it). > There's no point in SCSI having a flag which says "I don't support this > optional command" because we have to expect any device to say "I don't > support this command" with the correct return code ... so you might as > well just return the correct code and not add the flag. Well... if it's really completely optional.... I suppose filtering it in USB would be reasonable. I still don't like it, but I recognize that I'm not going to change your mind, and something needs to be done. INQUIRY was filtered only after months and months of work to identify the most "friendly" INQUIRY that could be sent to the device, and filtering in usb-storage was added as a very very last resort. Matt -- Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver Oh great modem, why hast thou forsaken me? -- Dust Puppy User Friendly, 3/2/1998
Attachment:
pgpXCVVt0AFFQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
