Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 23:06:37 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Cc: fredriks@mcs.com Subject: Re: kern/1245: scsi tape driver write-protect and eject handling is broken Message-ID: <199605252106.XAA27362@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199605251730.KAA05048@freefall.freebsd.org> from Lars Fredriksen at "May 25, 96 10:30:03 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
(Moved to freebsd-scsi) As Lars Fredriksen wrote: > Here are the context diffs. J"oerg was nice enough to point out > that I hadn't submitted context diffs. If someone is willing to review > these changes (Peter?), then I can submit them if that eases the load > on people. > *************** > *** 547,552 **** > --- 547,556 ---- > #define QIC_1320 0x12 > #define DDS 0x13 > #define DAT_1 0x13 > + #define EXB_8200 0x14 > + #define EXB_8500 0x15 > + #define EXB_8200C 0x8c > + #define EXB_8500C 0x90 > #define QIC_3080 0x29 > ! #define SCSI_2_MAX_DENSITY_CODE 0x17 /* maximum density code specified > ! #ifdef EXB_8500C > ! # define SCSI_2_MAX_DENSITY_CODE EXB_8500C > ! #else > ! # define SCSI_2_MAX_DENSITY_CODE 0x17 /* maximum density code specified There are two things here that are questionable. I don't particularly like the #ifdef EXB_8500C -- either we do support it, so it should be available all the time, or we don't. But the other thing (and that's why the freebsd-scsi) is that it wasn't clear that the entire conception of ``MAX_DENSITY_CODE'' seems to make sense. What are the pros and cons? Why is it there? Is it only ``legacy code''? -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605252106.XAA27362>