On 01/03/14 08:27, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 02/01/2014 19:23, Nathan Whitehorn ha scritto:
Let me try to grasp what you're doing here. You're trying to
figure out how many devices there are attached to the bus. For
every device you reserve a buffer block. Lun0 is mandatory, all
Il 02/01/2014 19:23, Nathan Whitehorn ha scritto:
>>> Let me try to grasp what you're doing here. You're trying to
>>> figure out how many devices there are attached to the bus. For
>>> every device you reserve a buffer block. Lun0 is mandatory, all
>>> others are optional.
>>>
>>> First off, I th
Il 02/01/2014 19:14, Nathan Whitehorn ha scritto:
>> > He should do something like :
>> > resp_data[i] |= dev->id & 0x3f;
>> > here to avoid a dev->id > 63 from spilling into the address method field.
>> >
>> > Or probably should have a check for
>> > if dev->id > 3 then fail
> OK.
No need fo
On 01/02/14 10:41, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 02.01.2014, at 16:31, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>> On 18.10.2013, at 14:33, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>>
>>> Intercept REPORT_LUNS commands addressed either to SRP LUN 0 or the
>>> well-known
>>> LUN for REPORT_LUNS commands. This is required to implemen
On 01/02/14 10:56, ronnie sahlberg wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 02.01.2014, at 16:31, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>> On 18.10.2013, at 14:33, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>>>
Intercept REPORT_LUNS commands addressed either to SRP LUN 0 or the
well-know
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 02.01.2014, at 16:31, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>>
>> On 18.10.2013, at 14:33, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>>
>>> Intercept REPORT_LUNS commands addressed either to SRP LUN 0 or the
>>> well-known
>>> LUN for REPORT_LUNS commands. This is r
On 02.01.2014, at 16:31, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 18.10.2013, at 14:33, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>
>> Intercept REPORT_LUNS commands addressed either to SRP LUN 0 or the
>> well-known
>> LUN for REPORT_LUNS commands. This is required to implement the SAM and SPC
>> specifications.
>>
>>
