Am Donnerstag, 25. Januar 2007 17:46 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > > > The capacity is incorrect. Mishandling a compliant device is not really
> > > > acceptable and for existing disks repartitioning is not an option.
> > >
> > > Can you provide more details? For each of the two devices, what are:
> > >
> > > The apparent capacity with FIX_CAPACITY set?
> >
> > Disk /dev/hda: 40.0 GB, 40007761920 bytes
> > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4864 cylinders
>
> It's the same value for both devices?
It is the same device, with or without the unusual_devs entry.
The heads, sectors/track and cylinders are identical. The capacity
differs by 512 bytes.
> > > The apparent capacity with FIX_CAPACITY not set (presumably
> > > exactly 1 block higher)?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Is the block size 512 bytes?
Yes.
> > > The actual capacity?
> >
> > Identical with the value above.
>
> This appears to contradict what you wrote earlier. If both devices have
> the same actual capacity and the same reported capacity, then how can the
> FIX_CAPACITY flag cause an error on one device but not the other?
There seems to be confusion. There's only one device I know of.
The other device belongs to Andrew.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
