Re: [PATCH][RFC] storage: Reject bogus max LUN values

2014-10-13 Thread Mark Knibbs
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:14:39 -0700 Matthew Dharm wrote: > Is there a constant we can pull from a SCSI header, instead of having > a "magic number" in the code? I don't know, but it would probably be in a USB-related header; isn't the 4-bits-for-LUN a USB mass storage bulk only thing? I guess yo

Re: [PATCH][RFC] storage: Reject bogus max LUN values

2014-10-13 Thread Matthew Dharm
Is there a constant we can pull from a SCSI header, instead of having a "magic number" in the code? Matt On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sun, 12 Oct 2014, Mark Knibbs wrote: > >> --- linux-3.17/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c.orig 2014-10-05 >> 20:12:36.0 +0100

Re: [PATCH][RFC] storage: Reject bogus max LUN values

2014-10-12 Thread Alan Stern
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014, Mark Knibbs wrote: > --- linux-3.17/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c.orig 2014-10-05 > 20:12:36.0 +0100 > +++ linux-3.17/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c2014-10-12 > 13:11:38.0 +0100 > @@ -1035,9 +1035,20 @@ int usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(struct us_data >