Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 20:43:58 +0100 (MET) From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG, richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: HP T4000s tape drive Message-ID: <199609301943.UAA00673@yedi.iaf.nl> In-Reply-To: <199609300625.IAA11367@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Sep 30, 96 08:25:42 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As J Wunsch wrote... > As Richard Tobin wrote: > > > > > ! #define SCSI_2_MAX_DENSITY_CODE 0xff /* SCSI 2 spec is out of date! */ > > > and this? The entire check for a ``max density'' could go. > > > > Well the user passes it in as a u_int32 (in the ioctl) and it gets > > assigned to a u_char (for the scsi_select), so perhaps a range check > > is still appropriate? > > No. It's garbage. There's no use of limiting the density range that > could be passed down to the device. The worst that happens (if a user > specifies a bogus density in the ``mt density'' command) is a SCSI > error that will pop up on the console. We already agreed before that > this test can go away. As an example: my DLT2000 can use 0x81 to switch to compressed mode. Drives should be smart enough to return invalid mode or something similar. Wilko _ ____________________________________________________________________ | / o / / _ Bulte email: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl - Arnhem, The Netherlands |/|/ / / /( (_) Do, or do not. There is no 'try' - Yoda --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609301943.UAA00673>