Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 20 Aug 2002 23:04:52 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org>
Cc:        Thomas Quinot <thomas@cuivre.fr.eu.org>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, scsi@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Proliferating quirk table entries
Message-ID:  <3D632D84.1CDEAD3@mindspring.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0208161526550.43909-100000@root.org> <20020821024614.A722@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> <20020820201636.A99025@panzer.kdm.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Kenneth D. Merry" wrote:
> The right way to handle the 6/10 byte stuff is to have it be a function of
> the transport type (see the CAM_NEW_TRAN_CODE stuff).  The peripheral
> drivers and userland applications can query the transport type and send
> 6 or 10 byte commands as appropriate.
> 
> If we're going to come up with a generic solution, that's probably the
> direction we need to be heading.


I think everyone in this thread needs to read the last instance
of this same thread, the first time it came up.

I believe the general consensus was to send the 6, and if it
failed, retry with the 10, and set a flag so that subsequent
requests were 10 (this instead of a static quirk table that
could find itself out of date).

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D632D84.1CDEAD3>