On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 14:31 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 17/07/2012 14:21, James Bottomley ha scritto: > >> Yes, I realize failing only on specific sense codes as I did it in the > >> patch is not going to work. However, the other way round is not > >> problematic (explicitly allow some sense codes, fail on all others). > > > > Heh, I once thought that, but there's no end to the strange ideas USB > > manufacturers get. > > :) > > >> > Another example is "target operating conditions have changed". QEMU > >> > cannot report such changes because scsi_error prints a warning (fine) > >> > and then passes the unit attention upwards. With removable drives, this > >> > has the same problem as resizing. > > Why would a removable device ever use any of the codes under this ASC > > when the medium hasn't changed? They're all for arrays (well except > > 0x10 and 0x11 ... and they're only supposed to apply to tape changers > > with autoload support declared in the control mode page). > > There are also a couple of generic ones such as "reported luns have > changed". I also considered briefly using "inquiry data has changed" to > reload the unmap parameters after live snapshot or storage migration. I > dropped the idea, please don't put me in the same bin as the USB > manufacturers.
I'm not ... but at the same time removable functionality in sd.c is special cased in quite a few areas which makes it fragile but exercised. Its fragility is somewhat mitigated by the fact that a lot of the special casing separates the removable from the non-removable paths. I don't want to increase that fragility by entangling the removable and non-removable paths without a good reason for doing so. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
