On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 10:30:51PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 05:12:29PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > > IMO this indicates we shouldn't issue any clear-halts at all unless the > > > device actually needs it. In general it's not a good idea to do a > > > clear-halt for an endpoint that isn't actually halted; devices are > > > prone to misinterpret the request. > > > > > > And since the only device we know of that does need the clear-halts is > > > long obsolete, the simplest strategy is just to leave them out. That > > > ancient ZIP-100 drive can be accomodated by adding a US_FL_SINGLE_LUN > > > flag for it, since the Get-Max-LUN is never issued when that flag is > > > set. > > > > My only issue is that we're effectively dropping support for a device that > > currently works. An obsolete device, I admit, but a device we currently > > support nevertheless. > > > > I suppose that really is the best option, tho. We just need to be on the > > lookout for reports of very old ZIP-100 drives breaking. > > If we add an unusual_devs entry for the old ZIP-100 with > US_FL_SINGLE_LUN then it should continue to work okay. But we can't do > that without the proper ID values. Maybe they're buried somewhere in > the mailing list archives, or maybe Pat Lavarre can provide them.
Pat left Iomega several years ago. I doubt he has access to that data.
Matt
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver
It's not that hard. No matter what the problem is, tell the customer
to reinstall Windows.
-- Nurse
User Friendly, 3/22/1998
pgpHosf2PYVBo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
