On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Eric Youngdale wrote:
> The underflow field isn't really used very much. Someone else added it
> long ago, and I never bothered to figure out exactly when and how it is
> supposed to be used. Thus the mid-level usually doesn't set the field. I
> am not wild about half-supported options - we should either rip it out
> entirely or figure out what it is supposed to be used for and finish the
> support. A lot of this depends upon whether support for underflow is
> something that people feel is worthwhile or not.
Personally, I think underflow is really an error condition, and should
cause an auto-REQUEST_SENSE and sense data to be returned along with
CHECK_CONDITION or some other message.
Really, in the case of an underflow, we've most likely got some type of
media problem. And it's very likely that even the part we _think_ got
read/written correctly didn't actually.
So I think we should rip this out.
Matt Dharm
P.S. Heh.. "half-supported options"... that's pretty much the way I feel
about the direction flag and sg driver right now. But that's another
discussion....
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Engineer, QCP Inc. Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh great modem, why hast thou forsaken me?
-- Dust Puppy
User Friendly, 3/2/1998
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
