From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 7 8: 2:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from niseko.junichi.org (niseko.junichi.org [210.238.191.91]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E01B1506A for ; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 08:02:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from junichi@junichi.org) Received: from norn.junichi.org (norn.pn.junichi.org [192.168.31.2]) by niseko.junichi.org (8.9.2+3.1W/3.7W-MQH-3.0) with ESMTP id AAA18443; Tue, 8 Jun 1999 00:02:02 +0900 (JST) Received: (from junichi@localhost) by norn.junichi.org (8.9.3/3.7W-client1.0) id AAA00351; Tue, 8 Jun 1999 00:02:02 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 00:02:02 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199906071502.AAA00351@norn.junichi.org> To: jedgar@fxp.org Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, junichi@junichi.org Subject: Re: wfd.c and ATAPI Zip In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 6 Jun 1999 22:35:02 JST". From: junichi@junichi.org (Junichi Satoh) X-Mailer: mnews [version 1.21] 1997-12/23(Tue) Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >> My thoughts now are: >> 1) My two drive are somewhat 'rogue' in that they don't conform to the >> driver's expectations. >> 2) When the driver was written, the '!strcmp' should be 'strcmp' since >> strcmp returns 0 when equal (-1 or 1 when < or >), in which case my patch >> makes sense: >> >> --- /sys/i386/isa/wfd.c.orig Thu Feb 18 17:06:08 1999 >> +++ /sys/i386/isa/wfd.c Tue Jun 6 08:59:59 1999 >> @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ >> * is known to lock up if transfers > 64 blocks are >> * requested. >> */ >> - if (!strcmp(ap->model, "IOMEGA ZIP 100 ATAPI")) { >> + if (strcmp(ap->model, "IOMEGA ZIP 100 ATAPI")) { >> printf("wfd%d: buggy Zip drive, 64-block transfer limit >> set\n", >> t->lun); >> t->maxblks = 64; >> >> 3) I've just plain lost it :) >> >> Can anyone else with an ATAPI Zip Drive confirm this? Hmm... I have an ATAPI ZIP drive: ======================================================================== wdc0: unit 1 (atapi): , removable, intr, iordis wfd1: medium type unknown (no disk) wfd1: buggy Zip drive, 64-block transfer limit set ======================================================================== It does not work with your patch. It's a buggy drive. Probably, using only strcmp() is not enough. We shoud distinguish buggy or not using revision number. #I don't know how many revisions are available. :-) --- Junichi Satoh junichi@junichi.org junichi@jp.FreeBSD.ORG To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message