Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:12:31 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Roudier?= <groudier@free.fr> Cc: Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@posi.net>, Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de>, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RBC support patch Message-ID: <200202212212.g1LMCVI52438@aslan.scsiguy.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 21 Feb 2002 00:06:10 %2B0100." <20020220235751.M2119-100000@gerard>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >This will uselessly run the risk of hurting some direct access devices >that are known to have to support either from specs or just by need >READ(10)/WRITE(10). Then flip the logic (10 then 6). These devices are supposed to report that the command is not supported. All indications I have is that the newer drives do. Older drives just fall of the bus and die if you send a 10byte cdb. >Anyway the *(10) commands are NOT functionnally equivalent to *(10) >function as you know. Right. Look at the code that builds these commands. The smallest command type that can satisfy a given request is used. You can optionally set a minimum command type size too. >May-be you just want to have best possible support for hard disks < 1GB. They work fine now. Why break them? -- Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202212212.g1LMCVI52438>