Well, if this is the case, then I guess what we have to do is fully
implement this feature, instead of leaving it half-cooked.
Matt Dharm
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >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
>
> It is standard practice in variable block tape applications to always
> issue a read for max block size. 99.999% of the reads result in a
> check_condition for requested size != actual. Its not a media problem.
>
> -steve
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Engineer, QCP Inc. Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We can customize our colonels.
-- Tux
User Friendly, 12/1/1998
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
