On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Matthew Dharm wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:40:32PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > Matt, have you ever run across any multi-LUN UFI devices? Perhaps we can > > save ourselves a lot of trouble by making them all automatically > > single-LUN. > > To be honest, not that I can remember. That's not to say it couldn't > happen, but it would be odd to have a multiple-floppy device...
That's what I thought. > This problem really breaks down into two different cases: > 1) UFI devices which do Bad Things(tm) when probed for multi-LUN > 2) UFI devices which answer on all LUNs when probed > > #2 is more common than #1 -- I think there may be a way to fix this in the > probing code. How could you detect #2 while probing? Or to put it another way, how could you tell that two INQUIRY responses actually refer to the same LUN and not to two different but very similar LUNs? > But #1-type devices I think deserve a place of shame in the > blacklist (they're also pretty rare). All right. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users
