From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E32C3A5A2 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 13:39:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F362339D for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 13:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kroah.com header.i=@kroah.com header.b="kaP5BkUe"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="fEfUxuMf" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728576AbfICNjh (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 09:39:37 -0400 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:53799 "EHLO out4-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727667AbfICNjh (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 09:39:37 -0400 Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAC84220A7; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 09:39:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 03 Sep 2019 09:39:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kroah.com; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm1; bh=gt6jXD9kW6hjVEToMQvMVQFYZbf ruSfRmUGV9CJbQus=; b=kaP5BkUevrHPOiTMJYYEUQuxrd8gVewPxJqPk19uF6U 3B48P0I3c+tCOlXPiyFTYATnBepjRAh49Sjj2jSh+96tLm0QuQzkQ9VcWJ1t1CCf AWlP+Afb732PU894nB/+fVie+z8X51/DrAcnMCjCdQine5mUePrli/VeK93dpY6V napVX02WkXRX+QtjdR3pqSDouqgYZYXDRcd7jAKT2ySXZaTzr4Yc/3oUOTgCqgaT 1oNpvf+AYwUg2Xz7vUE6SXj8ljTLjoDo0yRABftgALirbI3VLNGARai3JLEl2F4G Hd6Vt9FIM5LQY5w4dm1Uf43F91DoRhQKxUKTGMxIewA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=gt6jXD 9kW6hjVEToMQvMVQFYZbfruSfRmUGV9CJbQus=; b=fEfUxuMfITZ+MX76xHhQuG aNM/04PVtAPSzcRvd2Kls/5ZVh+vXXCGjdWvrEXhe7fJL2rMZ1qmRX6DDFHrUwyU jNJ7sgGGqd0b2Ij2NgWmUCqwquOEMDZS0OrPgyt95exw9GYH+/ST++4xxtWdloQM kWW9He4cb3pwv0exqVlUjeNczZlrx6/InldTxUp8azQlWpJh4ZtG2/lUEyfzNpCF XaQnHSzcxnmpOKMxfIAxnWZbT8wcJKb3/9BOM8Y+bnye8DJXTR4N8QHyONdoYHUA Kf2VikDYL5HLkH8+n1UGQ/4UM0CRS0Pv7uLwO6fmasSoPqgi/xfPtUSe6L2k0YEw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrudejfedgfeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujggfsehttd ertddtredvnecuhfhrohhmpefirhgvghcumffjuceoghhrvghgsehkrhhorghhrdgtohhm qeenucfkphepkeefrdekiedrkeelrddutdejnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe hgrhgvgheskhhrohgrhhdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2D3C880069; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 09:39:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:39:33 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Nathan Stratton Treadway Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Adding "UAS" protocol line to usb.ids file? Message-ID: <20190903133933.GA9435@kroah.com> References: <20190817220145.GJ1403@nathanst.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190817220145.GJ1403@nathanst.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-usb-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 06:01:45PM -0400, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote: > I noticed that when I use "lsusb -v" on a UAS-enabled drive enclosure, > the bInterfaceProtocol line for #80/0x50 has a "protocol name" label but the > one for #98/0x62 does not: > > > ======== > # lsusb -v -s2:15 | grep Interface > bDeviceClass 0 (Defined at Interface level) > bNumInterfaces 1 > Interface Descriptor: > bInterfaceNumber 0 > bInterfaceClass 8 Mass Storage > bInterfaceSubClass 6 SCSI > bInterfaceProtocol 80 Bulk-Only > iInterface 0 > Interface Descriptor: > bInterfaceNumber 0 > bInterfaceClass 8 Mass Storage > bInterfaceSubClass 6 SCSI > bInterfaceProtocol 98 > iInterface 0 > ======== > > > > So...I was wondering if there was any particular reason that protocol > 98 isn't included in the usb.ids file? No one got around to it? Feel free to submit a patch to the web site that handles these to upate it. thanks, greg k-h