Update libata's SMART-related ioctl handlers to match the current
ATA command pass-through specification (T10/04-262r7). Also change
related SCSI op-code definition to match current spec.
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
---
Contact w/ spec author (Curtis Stevens @ Western Digital) indicates
that while a revision 8 of the spec is expected, that it is really
only a re-formatting of the text to match T10 requirements. According
to Stevens, revision 8 is expected to be the last version of the spec.
drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c | 6 ++++--
include/scsi/scsi.h | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c.orig 2005-02-01 16:24:01.687622085 -0500
+++ sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-02-01 16:49:18.213876086 -0500
@@ -109,14 +109,16 @@ int ata_cmd_ioctl(struct scsi_device *sc
return -ENOMEM;
scsi_cmd[1] = (4 << 1); /* PIO Data-in */
+ scsi_cmd[2] = 0x0e; /* no off.line or cc, read from dev,
+ block count in sector count field */
sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
} else {
scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
+ /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_NONE;
}
scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
- scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
scsi_cmd[4] = args[2];
if (args[0] == WIN_SMART) { /* hack -- ide driver does this too... */
@@ -179,7 +181,7 @@ int ata_task_ioctl(struct scsi_device *s
memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
- scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
+ /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
scsi_cmd[4] = args[1];
scsi_cmd[6] = args[2];
scsi_cmd[8] = args[3];
--- sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h.orig 2005-02-01 16:22:12.390234346 -0500
+++ sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h 2005-02-01 16:23:02.828491161 -0500
@@ -113,9 +113,9 @@ extern const char *const scsi_device_typ
/* values for service action in */
#define SAI_READ_CAPACITY_16 0x10
-/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */
-#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == unused]*/
-#define ATA_12 0xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */
+/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
+#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
+#define ATA_12 0xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
/*
* SCSI Architecture Model (SAM) Status codes. Taken from SAM-3 draft
--
John W. Linville
[email protected]
On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote:
> Update libata's SMART-related ioctl handlers to match the current
> ATA command pass-through specification (T10/04-262r7). Also change
> related SCSI op-code definition to match current spec.
>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[email protected]>
> ---
> Contact w/ spec author (Curtis Stevens @ Western Digital) indicates
> that while a revision 8 of the spec is expected, that it is really
> only a re-formatting of the text to match T10 requirements. According
> to Stevens, revision 8 is expected to be the last version of the spec.
>
> drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c | 6 ++++--
> include/scsi/scsi.h | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --- sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c.orig 2005-02-01 16:24:01.687622085 -0500
> +++ sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-02-01 16:49:18.213876086 -0500
> @@ -109,14 +109,16 @@ int ata_cmd_ioctl(struct scsi_device *sc
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> scsi_cmd[1] = (4 << 1); /* PIO Data-in */
> + scsi_cmd[2] = 0x0e; /* no off.line or cc, read from dev,
> + block count in sector count field */
> sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
> } else {
> scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
> + /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
> sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_NONE;
> }
>
> scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
> - scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
>
> scsi_cmd[4] = args[2];
> if (args[0] == WIN_SMART) { /* hack -- ide driver does this too... */
> @@ -179,7 +181,7 @@ int ata_task_ioctl(struct scsi_device *s
> memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
> scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
> scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
> - scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
> + /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
> scsi_cmd[4] = args[1];
> scsi_cmd[6] = args[2];
> scsi_cmd[8] = args[3];
> --- sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h.orig 2005-02-01 16:22:12.390234346 -0500
> +++ sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h 2005-02-01 16:23:02.828491161 -0500
> @@ -113,9 +113,9 @@ extern const char *const scsi_device_typ
> /* values for service action in */
> #define SAI_READ_CAPACITY_16 0x10
>
> -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */
> -#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == unused]*/
> -#define ATA_12 0xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */
> +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
> +#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
> +#define ATA_12 0xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would
hate to think there would be a collision like that.
--
Jens Axboe
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote:
> > -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */
> > -#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == unused]*/
> > -#define ATA_12 0xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */
> > +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
> > +#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
> > +#define ATA_12 0xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
>
> Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would
> hate to think there would be a collision like that.
Well, I'm sure that is what is in T10/04-262r7 in Table 1 on Page 1.
The spec is available here:
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-262r7.pdf
Previous versions of the spec did not specify a value. As to whether
or not the current spec is in error, hopefully Curtis can elablorate?
John
--
John W. Linville
[email protected]
Jens Axboe wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are
> allocated */
> > -#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru
> [0x85 == unused]*/
> -#define ATA_12 0xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru
> [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */
> > +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
> > +#define ATA_16 0x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
> > +#define ATA_12 0xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
>
> Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would
> hate to think there would be a collision like that.
That very point came up recently in a MMC meeting:
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.05/05-056r0.pdf
To confuse things further "ATA_16" is shown as opcode 0x98
in the latest draft of SPC-3 (rev 21c 15 January 2005)
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/spc3/spc3r21c.pdf [annex D.3.1].
Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10
meeting in March.
Doug Gilbert
Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10
> meeting in March.
So that means I have to hold off releasing SMART support for SATA for
yet another couple months? Oh well...
Jeff