From owner-freebsd-current Wed Aug 7 23:40:24 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA14883 for current-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:40:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA14877; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608080640.XAA14877@freefall.freebsd.org> To: "M.R.Murphy" cc: julian@whistle.com, rd@thrush.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: SCSI Multiple LUN support - 2.2-960801-SNAP In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 Aug 1996 14:39:00 PDT." <199608072139.OAA01075@meerkat.mole.org> Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 23:40:21 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> we found so many devices that erroneously responded to >> all LUNS that we disabled it by default. > >A fine reason for leaving it disabled :-) I think that this approach was appropriate in the early days of SCSI when a large majority of the devices out there were non-compliant and simply ignored the lun field. Very few modern devices suffer from this problem (the Chinnon 525 is the last one I know of) and more and more devices require multi-lun support to function fully. Since NetBSD already has a full quirk list of the bogus devices, I don't see any reason not to enable Lun support by default. >There is also some ctrl-A setup stuff in the 2940 that refers to >multiple LUN support. That only affects the BIOS. It may be recorded in the SEEPROM on the card so that FreeBSD could honor it, but I'd rather see it become a userconfig type of option. >-- >Mike Murphy mrm@Mole.ORG +1 619 598 5874 >Better is the enemy of Good -- Justin T. Gibbs =========================================== FreeBSD: Turning PCs into workstations ===========================================