On Tue, 15 May 2012 18:29:04 +0200 Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 08:35 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > Of course, an easy way out would be to downgrade both the "Asking for > > > > cache data failed" and the "No Caching mode page present" errors to > > > > notices. But the SCSI people might disagree with that approach. > > > > > > Well, let's see what they say. > > > > What ever happened here, are these 3 patches acceptable, or do they need > > to be reworked or something else? > > Nothing happened after Alan's message. > > So, currently only the first patch was acceptable (to Alan, that is, but > it touched the SCSI code). > > At least, I haven't seen a reply from the SCSI people. Perhaps the best > thing to do is to submit a series of one or two trivial patches that > just downgrade the errors involved to notices. That should lead to > feedback by the SCSI people. Possibly we should have a hostadapter flag indicating if the cache noise is expected nuisance or not. That way if hardcore SCSI on real cables wants to keeep it then it can still be shut up for USB where its the norm and just irrelevant noise. -- 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
