On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:01:43PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > No. You shouldn't think of this as a USB problem any more; you should
> > consider it a SCSI/ATA problem. Try asking the people on the
> > linux-scsi and linux-ide mailing li
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 01:01:43PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> No. You shouldn't think of this as a USB problem any more; you should
> consider it a SCSI/ATA problem. Try asking the people on the
> linux-scsi and linux-ide mailing lists. But keep linux-usb in the CC:
> list just in case.
Coul
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I don't know how the ATA layer in Linux works. You'll have to ask
> > someone else or figure it out yourself.
> >
> >> I know we get to sd_prep_fn even when the drive in connected directly
> >> via
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> I don't know how the ATA layer in Linux works. You'll have to ask
> someone else or figure it out yourself.
>
>> I know we get to sd_prep_fn even when the drive in connected directly
>> via Sata, just not
>> sure which READ is used. I could fin
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>
> >>> Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
> >>> READ(16) but not READ(10) is a violation of the SCSI spec.
> >>>
>
> I can confirm that the use of READ(10) instead of READ(16)
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>>> Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
>>> READ(16) but not READ(10) is a violation of the SCSI spec.
>>>
I can confirm that the use of READ(10) instead of READ(16) is indeed
the problem here.
I hacked in some code that f
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Stern
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> >>
> >>> > Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
> >>> >
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>>
>>> > Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
>>> > READ(16) but not READ(10) is a violation of the SCSI spec.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>
>> > Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
>> > READ(16) but not READ(10) is a violation of the SCSI spec.
>> >
>> > I don't know what criterion Windows uses. Maybe it u
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> > Most likely that's the answer. Of course, for a device to recognize
> > READ(16) but not READ(10) is a violation of the SCSI spec.
> >
> > I don't know what criterion Windows uses. Maybe it uses READ(16)
> > whenever the total capacity is >= 2^32 blo
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>
>> I was comparing the two USB captures and I noticed the Windows capture
>> uses a READ(16) and Linux is using a READ(10). I'm not sure how the
>> kernel determines which read command to use, but I'm
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> I was comparing the two USB captures and I noticed the Windows capture
> uses a READ(16) and Linux is using a READ(10). I'm not sure how the
> kernel determines which read command to use, but I'm wondering if this
> could be the problem here?
It could
I was comparing the two USB captures and I noticed the Windows capture
uses a READ(16) and Linux is using a READ(10). I'm not sure how the
kernel determines which read command to use, but I'm wondering if this
could be the problem here?
I was way wrong about the first read being in the 700's btw
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> Here is the pcap file, as captured from Wireshark.
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> >
> >> I have a Seagate ST3000DM 3.0TB Sata Drive enclosed in a Vantec
> >> NexStar CX USB 3.0/2.0
Here is the pcap file, as captured from Wireshark.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
>
>> I have a Seagate ST3000DM 3.0TB Sata Drive enclosed in a Vantec
>> NexStar CX USB 3.0/2.0 Enclosure. This enclosure/drive is not
>> properly reco
On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> I have a Seagate ST3000DM 3.0TB Sata Drive enclosed in a Vantec
> NexStar CX USB 3.0/2.0 Enclosure. This enclosure/drive is not
> properly recognized by Linux when plugged in via a USB 2.0 port. My
> dmesg output, at first, seems like all is well. but
16 matches
Mail list logo