On Nov 3 18:54, Christian Franke wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Nov 3 17:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > On Nov 3 17:09, Christian Franke wrote: > > > > Unlike (S)ATA and NVMe, the serial number > > > > is not available for free in the device identify data block but > > > > requires an > > > > extra command (SCSI INQUIRY of VPD page 0x80). This might not be > > > > supported > > > > by the emulated controller or Windows does not use this command. > > > AFAICS, only the data from STORAGE_DEVICE_ID_DESCRIPTOR is available > > > which is equivalent to the data from VPD page 0x83. As you can see, > > > it's part of the STORAGE_DEVICE_UNIQUE_IDENTIFIER data. The data > > > returned for the VirtIo device is the identifier string "\x01\x00", > > > which is a bit underwhelming. > > > > > > Would be great if we would learn how to access page 0x80... > > Uhm... > > > > MSDN claims: > > > > If the storage device is SCSI-compliant, the port driver attempts to > > extract the serial number from the optional Unit Serial Number page > > (page 0x80) of the VPD. > > > > Now I'm puzzled. > > A quick test with a Debian 12 VM in VirtualBox with many virtual > controllers+drives shows the same problem: > Entries in /dev/disk/by-id appear only for virtual disks behind emulated > SATA and NVMe controllers, but not for SCSI and SAS controllers. > A test with "smartctl -i ..." with SCSI/SAS devices doesn't print a serial > number. In debug mode it prints "Vital Product Data (VPD) INQUIRY failed..." > and other messages that suggest limited/buggy support of optional SCSI > commands. > > If a Win11 PE (from install ISO) is run in same VM, the > STORAGE_DEVICE_DESCRIPTOR only provides the serial number for SATA (NVMe > drives not detected), but not for SCSI. > > Conclusion: The behavior of the current patch is compatible with Linux :-)
Ok, but with the DUID we have a workaround which makes it work even better than on Linux, so it would begreat if we used it, unless we find out where the UUID in "\GLOBAL??\Disk{<UUID>} comes from... Given the size of the STORAGE_DEVICE_UNIQUE_IDENTIFIER struct, we could even contemplate a 128 bit hash, just to be on the safe side. Corinna