On Monday 30 January 2017 18:43:12 Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Monday 30 January 2017 17:17:03 Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Sun, 29 Jan 2017, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 11 January 2017 16:23:29 Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16
On Monday 30 January 2017 17:17:03 Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2017, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 January 2017 16:23:29 Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > > In theory, I suppose we
On Sun, 29 Jan 2017, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 January 2017 16:23:29 Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > In theory, I suppose we could change the kernel so that it would
> > > > default to RE
On Wednesday 11 January 2017 16:23:29 Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > In theory, I suppose we could change the kernel so that it would
> > > default to READ CAPACITY(16) for devices that report a SCSI lev
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > In theory, I suppose we could change the kernel so that it would
> > default to READ CAPACITY(16) for devices that report a SCSI level >=
> > 3, or something along those lines. In general we h
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 January 2017 15:29:23 Alan Stern wrote:
> > > Tom Yan wrote that smartctl/hdparm "works" because they use the SCSI ATA
> > > PASSTHROUGH command. It is not an option for kernel?
> >
> > No, because many devices do not implement SCSI ATA PASST
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Dainius Masiliūnas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > It is used for preventing the kernel from issuing a READ CAPACITY(16)
> > command to the device. Normally the kernel would do this if the reply
> > to READ CAPACITY(10) indicated there were mo
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 15:29:23 Alan Stern wrote:
> > Tom Yan wrote that smartctl/hdparm "works" because they use the SCSI ATA
> > PASSTHROUGH command. It is not an option for kernel?
>
> No, because many devices do not implement SCSI ATA PASSTHROUGH.
> (Consider devices whose underlying tec
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 14:12:25 James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > In theory, I suppose we could change the kernel so that it would
> > default to READ CAPACITY(16) for devices that report a SCSI level >=
> > 3, or something along those lines. I
On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 16:00 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> In theory, I suppose we could change the kernel so that it would
> default to READ CAPACITY(16) for devices that report a SCSI level >=
> 3, or something along those lines. In general we hesitate to make
> changes of this sort, because they
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> It is used for preventing the kernel from issuing a READ CAPACITY(16)
> command to the device. Normally the kernel would do this if the reply
> to READ CAPACITY(10) indicated there were more than 2^32 blocks (about
> 2 TB).
Ah, OK, that makes
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Dainius Masiliūnas wrote:
> (I pressed reply instead of reply to all, sorry. Resending this.)
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > There _is_ a quirk for broken models. However, we don't know how
> > complete the set of quirk entries is, so we err on t
(I pressed reply instead of reply to all, sorry. Resending this.)
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> There _is_ a quirk for broken models. However, we don't know how
> complete the set of quirk entries is, so we err on the side of caution.
Then what is it used for? There doesn
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Dainius Masiliūnas wrote:
> Huh, intersting to know. Why would they die on 16 and not on 10? Also,
Probably because they are too old to support READ CAPACITY(16)
correctly.
> wouldn't the right way to handle it be to use a quirk for broken
> models, then? Since my disk seem
On Tuesday 10 January 2017 21:02:09 Alan Stern wrote:
> Quick summary: READ CAPACITY(10) does not include physical sector
> size information whereas READ CAPACITY(16) does. But the kernel
> uses READ CAPACITY(10) by default for USB drives, because quite a
> few of them die when given a READ CAPACI
Huh, intersting to know. Why would they die on 16 and not on 10? Also,
wouldn't the right way to handle it be to use a quirk for broken
models, then? Since my disk seems to work fine in that regard.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Per Tom Yan suggestion I'm forwarding bug from bugzilla to this ML:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102271
This really should be sent to the linux-scsi mailing list (CC'ed) as
well as to linux-usb.
> === Dainius Masiliūnas wrote: ===
>
>
Per Tom Yan suggestion I'm forwarding bug from bugzilla to this ML:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102271
=== Dainius Masiliūnas wrote: ===
When using an Advanced Format drive connected through a SCSI-to-ATA Translation
device, the physical
block size reported by the kernel (in
/
18 matches
Mail list logo
