Alexander Motin <m...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > The question still remains whether the previous implementation did return
> > resid
> >> 0 in some cases. In this case, I would need to implement both variants in
> >> the
> > libscg adaption layer and I would need to know whether I am running on an
> > old
> > version or on a new version kernel. Do you know of a simple method to
> > implement
> > this distinction?
>
> Yes, some drivers were permanently reporting zero resid, while others
> (mostly real SCSI) were reporting proper values. Now it is the same,
> just more cases should work properly.
>
> Why do you want/need to distinguish them? You should already handle
> non-zero resid properly. Zero resid may be wrong in some cases, but at
> first I don't see fatal problem from it and at second I don't see what
> can you do about it.
>
> If I am missing something - sorry, explain it to me please.
Compare the number of sense bytes I like to request (18) with the number
previous FreeBSD versions did actually request. It is obvious that in case
there is a resid reported onm an old kernel, libscg (with your chanhge) would
believe that probably less that the absolute minumum of sense data is available.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
