On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 05:04:19PM -0500, Thomas Dodd wrote:
>
>
> Rogier Wolff wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 10:46:31AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 12:37:37PM -0500, Thomas Dodd wrote:
> >>
> >>>I get the feeling it's not a true mass storage device.
> >>
> >>Sounds like it.
> >
> >
> > Nope. Sure does sound like it's a mass storage device. And it works
> > too.
> >
> > The kernel managed to read the partition table off it, and got
> > one valid partition: sda1.
>
> Accept that you cannot read data from the device. At all.
> Even dd fails. And the windows drivers work (using XP
> in vmware it think it was) correctly on this same device.
>
> -Thomas
But it did read the first 8 blocks off the devices when it
read the partition, the usb debug showed:
usb-storage: Command READ_10 (10 bytes)
usb-storage: 28 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 08 00 30 da
With offsets starting at 0 -
Bytes 2 - 5 are the logical block address, all 0.
Bytes 7 - 8 are the transfer length - 8 blocks.
The last two bytes are junk.
You should be able to run the equivalent:
dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/zero bs=512 count=8
And, look in dmesg for the failure message of the first read that fails, it
could have set the device offline.
-- Patrick Mansfield
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts
on Hammer Technology! Open Source & Linux Developers, register now
for the AMD Developer Symposium. Code: EX8664
http://www.developwithamd.com/developerlab
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users
