* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) @ 2006-01-25 2:58 Albert Cahalan 2006-01-25 16:31 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-25 2:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel, schilling, rlrevell, matthias.andree Joerg Schilling writes: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: >> S3 Device enumeration/probing is a sore spot. Unprivileged >> "cdrecord dev=ATA: -scandisk" doesn't work, and recent >> discussions on the cdwrite@ list didn't make any progress. >> My observation is that cdrecord stops probing /dev/hd* devices >> as soon as one yields EPERM, on the assumption "if I cannot >> access /dev/hda, I will not have sufficient privilege to >> write a CD anyways". I find this wrong, Joerg finds it correct >> and argues "if you can access /dev/hdc as unprivileged user, >> that's a security problem". > > This are two problems: > > - users of cdrecord like to run cdrecord -scanbus in order > to find all SCSI devices. This no longer works since the > non-orthogonal /dev/hd* SCSI transport has been added. > > As Linux already implements a Generic SCSI transport > interface (/dev/sg*) people would asume to be able to > talk to _all_ SCSI devices using this interface. > To allows this, there is a need for a SCSI HBA driver > that sends SCSI commands via a ATA interface. > > - some people seem to set the permissions of some of the > /dev/hd* nodes to unsafe values and then complain that > the other /dev/hd* nodes cannot be opened. **sigh** Matthias Andree said "(Joerg, please don't talk about layer violations here)", yet you do. We Linux users will forever patch your software to work the way every Linux app is supposed to work. (well, assuming nobody succumbs to a well-caffeinated urge to fork the code) Really, "users of cdrecord like to run cdrecord -scanbus"??? They LIKE running a command to generate phony SCSI addresses? That's news to me. To better protect users from terrible accidents, Linux should avoid assigning a /dev/sg* device for anything with a regular device file. This, along with elimination of the obsolete ide-scsi crud, would make things a lot more safe and sane. BTW, before Joerg mentions portability, I'd like to remind everyone that all modern OSes support the use of normal device names for SCSI. The most awkward is FreeBSD, where you have to do a syscall or two to translate the name to Joerg's very non-hotplug non-iSCSI way of thinking. Windows, MacOS X, and even Solaris all manage to handle device names just fine. In numerous cases, not just Linux, cdrecord is inventing crap out of thin air to satisfy a pre-hotplug worldview. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 2:58 CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-25 16:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > We Linux users will forever patch your software to work the Looks like you are not a native English speaker. "We" is incorrect here, as you only speak for yourself. > BTW, before Joerg mentions portability, I'd like to remind > everyone that all modern OSes support the use of normal device > names for SCSI. The most awkward is FreeBSD, where you have > to do a syscall or two to translate the name to Joerg's very > non-hotplug non-iSCSI way of thinking. Windows, MacOS X, and > even Solaris all manage to handle device names just fine. In > numerous cases, not just Linux, cdrecord is inventing crap out > of thin air to satisfy a pre-hotplug worldview. Looks like you are badly informed, so I encourage you to get yourself informed properly before sending your next postig.... libscg includes 22 different SCSI low level transport implementations. - Only 5 of them allow a /dev/hd* device name related access. - 11 of them use file descriptors as handles for sending SCSI commands but do not have a name <-> fs relation and thus _need_ a SCSI device naming scheme as libscg offers. This is because there is no 1:1 relation between SCSI addressing and a fd retrieved from a /dev/* entry. - 6 of them not even allow to get a file descriptors as handles for sending SCSI commands. These platforms of course need the SCSI device naming scheme as libscg offers. Conclusion: 17 Platforms _need_ the addressing scheme libscg offers 5 Platforms _may_ use a different access method too. NOTE: Amongst the 6 plaforms that do not allow to even get a file descriptor there is a modern OS like MacOS X BTW: the wording of your posting did give you a negative score. If you continue the same way, it may be that your next posting will remain unanswered even though it may be wring and needs a correction like this one. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 16:31 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-25 17:08 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-25 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan On Jan 25, 2006, at 11:31, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: >> We Linux users will forever patch your software to work the > > Looks like you are not a native English speaker. "We" is incorrect > here, as you only speak for yourself. I agree completely with his statements, therefore he speaks for at least two people and "we" is proper usage. I suspect given the posts on this list the last time this flamewar came up that there are more as well, but 2 is enough. > libscg includes... Irrelevant to the discussion at hand, we are talking only about linux and what should be done on linux. > - Only 5 of them allow a /dev/hd* device name related access. No, you have this wrong: - One of them (IE: Linux) requires a /dev/[hs]d* device-name related access - Only 4 others allow /dev/hd* However, the later is _completely_ _irrelevant_ to the discussion, as we are talking about Linux *only*. > [irrelevant discussion of other platforms] > 17 Platforms _need_ the addressing scheme libscg offers > 5 Platforms _may_ use a different access method too. Wrong again: 17 platforms need libscg's addressing 4 platforms offer /dev/* access 1 platform (Linux) _requires_ /dev/* access You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer accordingly. > BTW: the wording of your posting [...] Personal attacks are offtopic, irrelevant, and rude. Please refrain from doing so. If you don't plan to respond to somebody's email, just don't, no reason to shout about it to a world who doesn't care. Cheers, Kyle Moffett -- Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming -- C.A.R. Hoare ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-25 17:08 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-25 17:18 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kyle Moffett; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, rlrevell, linux-kernel, acahalan Kyle Moffett wrote: > On Jan 25, 2006, at 11:31, Joerg Schilling wrote: >> Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: >>> We Linux users will forever patch your software to work the >> >> Looks like you are not a native English speaker. "We" is incorrect >> here, as you only speak for yourself. > > I agree completely with his statements, therefore he speaks for at > least two people and "we" is proper usage. I suspect given the posts > on this list the last time this flamewar came up that there are more as > well, but 2 is enough. > >> libscg includes... > > Irrelevant to the discussion at hand, we are talking only about linux > and what should be done on linux. Well, cdrecord relies on libscg, so in effect most of the portability code that is affected is in libscg; some of the real-time code however is specific to cdrecord. >> - Only 5 of them allow a /dev/hd* device name related access. > > No, you have this wrong: > > - One of them (IE: Linux) requires a /dev/[hs]d* device-name related > access /dev/sd* for CD writing? I think you're off track here. AFAICS cdrecord uses /dev/sg* to access the writer. > - Only 4 others allow /dev/hd* > > However, the later is _completely_ _irrelevant_ to the discussion, as > we are talking about Linux *only*. This, and if the code can then be used on other platforms, then there is little point in calling the Linux /dev/hd* device "badly designed", unless there were problems with it that prevented cdrecord (or libscg, for pxupdate or something like that) from working properly. So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. The numbers we get from ide-scsi for ATAPI writers are skewed anyhow, I'm getting 1,0,0 for a SATA hard disk, 2,0,0 for secondary master DVD-RAM/±R[W], 3,0,0 for secondary slave CD-RW... I wonder why these could be desirable, and if they are really as static as they pretend to be. I doubt that, their numbers depend on the order of driver loading. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:08 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 17:18 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 17:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-25 18:17 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 17:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree; +Cc: schilling, rlrevell, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > Irrelevant to the discussion at hand, we are talking only about linux > > and what should be done on linux. > > Well, cdrecord relies on libscg, so in effect most of the portability code > that is affected is in libscg; some of the real-time code however is > specific to cdrecord. This is correct, as (looking at other programs from cdrtools) cdrecord is the only program that needs realtime scheduling. > So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via > ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. But device enumeration is the central point when implementing -scanbus. Note that all OS that I am aware of internally use a device enumeration scheme that is close to what libscg uses. This ie even true for Linux. If Linux did not hide this information for /dev/hd* based fd's, I could implement an abstraction layer..... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:18 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 17:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 9:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 18:17 ` Jens Axboe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: mrmacman_g4, rlrevell, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling wrote: >> So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via >> ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. > > But device enumeration is the central point when implementing -scanbus. Again: Is there anything *besides* (<German>: außer) device enumeration that does not work with the current /dev/hd* SG_IO interface? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:30 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 9:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 10:34 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-26 11:09 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > >> So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via > >> ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. > > > > But device enumeration is the central point when implementing -scanbus. > > Again: Is there anything *besides* (<German>: außer) device enumeration that > does not work with the current /dev/hd* SG_IO interface? This is the main point. People like to run cdrecord -scanbus in order to find a list of usable devices. People like to see all SCSI devices in a single name space as they are all using the same protocol for communication. A sane way to send SCSI commands to _any_ type of devices would be to have a SCSI generic transport layer that is independent from the high-level features of the OS and that is independent from whether there is a high-level driver for this device at all. This is what I designed the scg driver interface for in 1986 and this is what Adaptec did in 1988 with ASPI. This is of course also why the SCSI standard commitee made a proposal for the CAM SCSI interface. http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/cam/cam-r12b.pdf http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/cam3/cam3r03.pdf Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 9:50 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 10:34 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 11:09 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-26 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: matthias.andree, rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan On 1/26/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: [...] > People like to run cdrecord -scanbus in order to find a list of usable devices. > People like to see all SCSI devices in a single name space as they are all > using the same protocol for communication. If by people you mean developer, I might agree. If by people you mean user, I disagree. As a Linux user, the only reason I do cdrecord -scanbus is to comply to the cdrecord way of doing likes. I don't personally like it. I'd rather use /dev/cdrw, in a machine independent way, as in: ssh user@host cdrecord dev=/dev/cdrw /path/to/file.iso Jerome ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 10:34 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:23 ` Gene Heskett ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jerome.lacoste Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan jerome lacoste <jerome.lacoste@gmail.com> wrote: > As a Linux user, the only reason I do cdrecord -scanbus is to comply > to the cdrecord way of doing likes. I don't personally like it. > > I'd rather use /dev/cdrw, in a machine independent way, as in: > > ssh user@host cdrecord dev=/dev/cdrw /path/to/file.iso On the vast majority of OS this does not work. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 18:23 ` Gene Heskett 2006-01-26 19:38 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-27 5:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Gene Heskett @ 2006-01-26 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel On Thursday 26 January 2006 09:03, Joerg Schilling wrote: >jerome lacoste <jerome.lacoste@gmail.com> wrote: >> As a Linux user, the only reason I do cdrecord -scanbus is to comply >> to the cdrecord way of doing likes. I don't personally like it. >> >> I'd rather use /dev/cdrw, in a machine independent way, as in: >> >> ssh user@host cdrecord dev=/dev/cdrw /path/to/file.iso > >On the vast majority of OS this does not work. > >Jörg But from the Joe SixPack user standpoint, he should be able to click to launch the program, and click on the file he wants to put on the cd. The leds on the face of the drive should come on and the cd should come out. All he knows is its that thing with the coffee holder sticking out of the front of the box that he had to remove his beer from to put in the blank cd & he doesn't care, *as long as it works*. You have been offered a way to simplify your interface by many many lines of code, yet you resist, insisting that all other platforms do it your way, when in fact they don't either according to several lengthy threads I've now read on this subject. There are far more winderz users than linux so far, and the winderz interface, except for the actual names used (drive F, what a strange moniker that is) is no more nor less complex, and both _just work_ if properly used. A simple case: statement should handle it all. So whats the problem? -- Cheers, Gene People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word 'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:23 ` Gene Heskett @ 2006-01-26 19:38 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-27 5:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-26 19:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan On 1/26/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > jerome lacoste <jerome.lacoste@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > As a Linux user, the only reason I do cdrecord -scanbus is to comply > > to the cdrecord way of doing likes. I don't personally like it. > > > > I'd rather use /dev/cdrw, in a machine independent way, as in: > > > > ssh user@host cdrecord dev=/dev/cdrw /path/to/file.iso > > On the vast majority of OS this does not work. 1- I don't care if that works or not on other OSes. This is a fonctionality I expect to work on my target host. 2- cdrecord locks the user inside its own terminology, instead of a being open to the platform, for 'cross-platform compatibility reasons' Sorry but I don't buy any of that. Now, if someone was to provide you with patches to support the Linux way of doing things, keeping all your functionality as it is today, just reorganizing the code in a slightly different way, would you consider looking at the patches? Jerome ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:23 ` Gene Heskett 2006-01-26 19:38 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-27 5:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2006-01-27 13:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2006-01-27 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jerome.lacoste, rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1034 bytes --] On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:03:11 +0100, Joerg Schilling said: > jerome lacoste <jerome.lacoste@gmail.com> wrote: > > ssh user@host cdrecord dev=/dev/cdrw /path/to/file.iso > > On the vast majority of OS this does not work. OK.. If "vast majority" is the proper way to decide this issue.. .. What does WinXP call the CD writer device? What's wrong with this picture? Maybe "vast majority" is the wrong criteria... 'cdrecord -scanbus' tells me I'm supposed to use 'dev=0,1,0', which has *zero* meaning to me, since my laptop has no SCSI in it. Fortunately, I also have a /dev/hdb, and 'dev=/dev/hdb' works the way one would expect if they weren't attached to a 1986-style naming scheme for some transport mechanism that isn't present on my hardware. And you know what? I really don't give a flying <fornicate> in a rolling donut what FreeBSD calls the device. If I did, I'd have installed FreeBSD. But I installed a Fedora distro of Linux, and the only sane naming scheme is the one that Fedora uses... [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 5:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2006-01-27 13:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-27 14:09 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 23:28 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-27 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valdis.Kletnieks, schilling Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, acahalan Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > And you know what? I really don't give a flying <fornicate> in a rolling donut > what FreeBSD calls the device. If I did, I'd have installed FreeBSD. But I It has been mentioned here many times, you only need to read it. FreeBSD comes with a T-10 (SCSI) compliant CAM interface that uses a multiplex device and dev=b,t,l to address the devices. This is true for _all_ kind of SCSI devices and thus includes ATAPI transport. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 13:15 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-27 14:09 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 23:28 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-27 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks, rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, acahalan On Jan 27, 2006, at 08:15:02, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: >> And you know what? I really don't give a flying <fornicate> in a >> rolling donut what FreeBSD calls the device. If I did, I'd have >> installed FreeBSD. > > It has been mentioned here many times, you only need to read it. > > FreeBSD comes with [desc of freebsd SCSI]. Jörg, can you read English properly? Did you read what he wrote at *ALL*? This is EXACTLY why people have been flaming you on this list. He just wrote in sufficiently graphic detail how he doesn't care what FreeBSD does. You promptly replied with a description of FreeBSD. ARE YOU READING WHAT WE TYPE?!?!?! This is it, I give up; you cannot have a reasonable discussion on this list and therefore are only contributing to the noise. Plonk! Cheers, Kyle Moffett ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 13:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-27 14:09 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-27 23:28 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-27 23:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > > > And you know what? I really don't give a flying <fornicate> in a rolling donut > > what FreeBSD calls the device. If I did, I'd have installed FreeBSD. But I > > It has been mentioned here many times, you only need to read it. > > FreeBSD comes with a T-10 (SCSI) compliant CAM interface that uses a multiplex > device and dev=b,t,l to address the devices. This is true for _all_ kind of > SCSI devices and thus includes ATAPI transport. Is CAM relevant at all for ATAPI, USB, IEEE1394, parport and other transports? Where is the link between ATAPI's SCSI/MMC command set and SCSI CAM standard applying to ATAPI devices? (File name of the standard or latest draft and chapter is sufficient.) -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 9:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 10:34 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-26 11:09 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-26: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > > >> So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via > > >> ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. > > > > > > But device enumeration is the central point when implementing -scanbus. > > > > Again: Is there anything *besides* (<German>: außer) device enumeration that > > does not work with the current /dev/hd* SG_IO interface? > > This is the main point. So there is no real reason. > People like to run cdrecord -scanbus in order to find a list of usable devices. > People like to see all SCSI devices in a single name space as they are all > using the same protocol for communication. I find -scanbus rather annoying, particularly since it doesn't scan all buses, I need to query cdrecord for the implemented transports, run -scanbus for each of them again, and everything. I know what device my writer has, SG_IO is sufficiently capable to write CDs, is the declared standard for Linux parallel ATA-PI devices and I want cdrecord to stop pissing at my leg for knowing the device up front. > A sane way to send SCSI commands to _any_ type of devices would be to have a > SCSI generic transport layer that is independent from the high-level features > of the OS and that is independent from whether there is a high-level driver for > this device at all. It appears as though the high-level driver gave you exactly that generic mid-level access. If Linux violates design principles, is none of your business as long as your application works. > This is what I designed the scg driver interface for in 1986 and this is what Yes, 20 years ago. How relevant is this for OSes that needed to be updated in 2005 to support cdrecord again? And what has this got to do with libscg's bogus assumptions ("If I cannot have /dev/hda, I don't need to probe /dev/hdc anyways") after you've agreed that resmgr and similar to allow console users access to ONLY the writer were no major security risk? > Adaptec did in 1988 with ASPI. This is of course also why the SCSI standard > commitee made a proposal for the CAM SCSI interface. We don't have ASPI on Linux, you're digressing. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:18 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 17:30 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 18:17 ` Jens Axboe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-01-25 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, rlrevell, linux-kernel, acahalan On Wed, Jan 25 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > So I'll repeat my question: is there anything that SG_IO to /dev/hd* (via > > ide-cd) cannot do that it can do via /dev/sg*? Device enumeration doesn't count. > > But device enumeration is the central point when implementing > -scanbus. And that's why I state it's useless on Linux. > Note that all OS that I am aware of internally use a device > enumeration scheme that is close to what libscg uses. This ie even > true for Linux. If Linux did not hide this information for /dev/hd* > based fd's, I could implement an abstraction layer..... Not true, Linux has nothing of the sort internally for eg ATAPI devices. I don't know why you think that, but it's simply not true at all. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-25 17:08 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 18:05 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-25 23:08 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, mrmacman_g4; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com> wrote: > > [irrelevant discussion of other platforms] Incorrect, sorry. Do you really make Linux incompatible to the rest of the world? > > 17 Platforms _need_ the addressing scheme libscg offers > > 5 Platforms _may_ use a different access method too. > > Wrong again: > 17 platforms need libscg's addressing > 4 platforms offer /dev/* access > 1 platform (Linux) _requires_ /dev/* access Your last line is wrong > You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer accordingly. The Linux Kernel fols unfortunately artificially hides information for the /dev/hd* interface making exactly this compatibility impossible. > Personal attacks are offtopic, irrelevant, and rude. Please refrain > from doing so. If you don't plan to respond to somebody's email, > just don't, no reason to shout about it to a world who doesn't care. If you are against personal attacks, why didn't you intercede for the postings from Jens Axboe and Albert Cahalan? I am against personal attacks and this is the first time where it tooks more than a day before LKML people started with personal attacks against me. So in principle this is some sort of progress compared to former times. If you like to continue this discussion, I would like you to stay reasonable and help to keep the discussion stay based on technical based arguments. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-25 18:05 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-26 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 23:08 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-25 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan On Jan 25, 2006, at 12:14:15, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Incorrect, sorry. Do you really make Linux incompatible to the rest > of the world? Why should we care about compatibility with those interfaces? Half our networking stack includes interfaces (like IPTables) that aren't compatible with _BSD_ from which parts of it were derived, let alone with Windows or Solaris. >> 1 platform (Linux) _requires_ /dev/* access > Your last line is wrong No, it is correct. We require /dev/* access. The fact that we included /dev/sg* devices for /dev/[sh]d* was a mistake, and should be fixed, but those are still /dev/* access. >> You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer >> accordingly. > The Linux Kernel fols unfortunately artificially hides information > for the /dev/hd* interface making exactly this compatibility > impossible. We provide enough information for everybody else to be happy, including the dvd+rw-tools package. What else do you need and why? >> Personal attacks are offtopic, irrelevant, and rude. Please >> refrain from doing so. If you don't plan to respond to somebody's >> email, just don't, no reason to shout about it to a world who >> doesn't care. > > If you are against personal attacks, why didn't you intercede for > the postings from Jens Axboe and Albert Cahalan? Because I didn't see them. > I am against personal attacks and this is the first time where it > tooks more than a day before LKML people started with personal > attacks against me. I would encourage you to ignore all personal attacks. The people making them are doing so frequently because either (A) they feel they have been attacked and are retaliating or (B) they don't have a valid technical point to make. In either case the signal-to-noise ratio is better if you ignore the attack and don't respond in turn, which will frequently cause the offending party to cease their attacks as well. One other note: Please do not tell Linux kernel developers that you know what is best for the Linux kernel. If you have a specific bug or a proposed patch it will be thoroughly considered, but vague declarations of problems are insufficient. Cheers, Kyle Moffett ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 18:05 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-26 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 10:40 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, mrmacman_g4; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com> wrote: > On Jan 25, 2006, at 12:14:15, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Incorrect, sorry. Do you really make Linux incompatible to the rest > > of the world? .. > >> 1 platform (Linux) _requires_ /dev/* access > > Your last line is wrong > > No, it is correct. We require /dev/* access. The fact that we > included /dev/sg* devices for /dev/[sh]d* was a mistake, and should > be fixed, but those are still /dev/* access. Looks like you missunderstood /dev/* here. Even with /dev/scg* on Solaris or with CAM on FreeBSD, you open a device. But this is not a /dev/ entry for a high level device like a disk, it is a SCSI nexus device that allows you to send SCSI commands on any SCSI transport. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 10:40 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 14:05 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-26: > Even with /dev/scg* on Solaris or with CAM on FreeBSD, you open a device. > But this is not a /dev/ entry for a high level device like a disk, it is > a SCSI nexus device that allows you to send SCSI commands on any SCSI > transport. As long as the device you open allows you to send SCSI commands on any suitable (not just SCSI) transport, why bother? -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 10:40 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 14:05 ` Joerg Schilling [not found] ` <20060126103004.07e02876.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-26: > > > Even with /dev/scg* on Solaris or with CAM on FreeBSD, you open a device. > > But this is not a /dev/ entry for a high level device like a disk, it is > > a SCSI nexus device that allows you to send SCSI commands on any SCSI > > transport. > > As long as the device you open allows you to send SCSI commands on any > suitable (not just SCSI) transport, why bother? If you open e.g. /dev/cam or /dev/scg?, you open device that is not related to a high level service like /dev/hd* and this unfortunately is unable to talk to other devices in the same entity (e.g. ATAPI tapes). With /dev/cam or similar you get a single handle for a group of devices that than are addressed via something very similar to dev=b,t,l Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20060126103004.07e02876.seanlkml@sympatico.ca>]
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) [not found] ` <20060126103004.07e02876.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> @ 2006-01-26 15:30 ` sean 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: sean @ 2006-01-26 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: schilling, matthias.andree, rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:05:42 +0100 Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > If you open e.g. /dev/cam or /dev/scg?, you open device that is not related > to a high level service like /dev/hd* and this unfortunately is unable to talk > to other devices in the same entity (e.g. ATAPI tapes). > > With /dev/cam or similar you get a single handle for a group of devices that > than are addressed via something very similar to dev=b,t,l > So what? Why is it so important to have just a single handle in this case as opposed to multiple handles? Sean ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 18:05 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-25 23:08 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 12:27 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-25 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-25: > > You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer accordingly. > > The Linux Kernel fols unfortunately artificially hides information for the > /dev/hd* interface making exactly this compatibility impossible. What information is actually missing? You keep talking about phantoms, without naming them. Again: device enumeration doesn't count, libscg already does that. > If you are against personal attacks, why didn't you intercede for the > postings from Jens Axboe and Albert Cahalan? Because ignoring attacks is more efficient. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 23:08 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 12:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-25: > > > > You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer accordingly. > > > > The Linux Kernel fols unfortunately artificially hides information for the > > /dev/hd* interface making exactly this compatibility impossible. > > What information is actually missing? You keep talking about phantoms, > without naming them. Again: device enumeration doesn't count, libscg > already does that. I am not talking about phantoms, I am always requestung the same things. It only seems that people here ignore these issues. The only integrative (and this useful for libscg) interface on Linux is /dev/sg* /dev/hd* may look nice if you only look skin-deep How do you e.g. like send SCSI commands to ATAPI tape drives on Linux? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 12:27 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 16:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 17:55 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-27 14:30 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 01:27:59PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-25: > > > > > > You are perfectly free to adjust your compatibility layer accordingly. > > > > > > The Linux Kernel fols unfortunately artificially hides information for the > > > /dev/hd* interface making exactly this compatibility impossible. > > > > What information is actually missing? You keep talking about phantoms, > > without naming them. Again: device enumeration doesn't count, libscg > > already does that. > > I am not talking about phantoms, I am always requestung the same things. > It only seems that people here ignore these issues. > > The only integrative (and this useful for libscg) interface on Linux is /dev/sg* > > /dev/hd* may look nice if you only look skin-deep > > How do you e.g. like send SCSI commands to ATAPI tape drives on Linux? I see you asking this again and again, and you seem to want to hear this answer: "You don't." I haven't checked the code, but I guess the SG_IO interface isn't available there. And I don't think this is a problem, because a) if it was needed, it can be added trivially with minimum added code, b) ATAPI tapes are dead, much the way ATAPI floppies are. So can you now stop repeating this question, please? It has no relevance to CD burning. I admit I can see the elegance in your /dev/scg solution on Solaris, but you should accept that you're not going to get anything like that on Linux, because it simply doesn't fit in the Linux frame of doing things. In Linux we have devices and operate on them. They can be hotplugged and assigned stable names via udev. A tunnel into the transport layer, like your /dev/scg on Solaris, simply doesn't have place in Linux. I believe that if you added Linux 2.6 support code in libscg/cdrecord, that'd simply accept the device name as an argument and didn't use *any* scanning code at all, you'd make a lot of people happy (*). Quite possibly everyone minus one man. Which would be a great achievement. (*) It'd be impossible to burn CDs in a tape drive on Linux then, but, I don't think that'll cause a lot of grief. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 16:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 17:55 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-27 14:30 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 17:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vojtech Pavlik; +Cc: linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 05:10:28PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > I believe that if you added Linux 2.6 support code in libscg/cdrecord, > that'd simply accept the device name as an argument and didn't use *any* > scanning code at all, you'd make a lot of people happy (*). Quite possibly > everyone minus one man. Which would be a great achievement. Since Jens does not seem available anymore do you know how one is supposed to do the cdrom-ish device enumeration at that point? Is HAL the official kernel interface to that now? OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 17:55 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 18:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 06:55:07PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > > I believe that if you added Linux 2.6 support code in libscg/cdrecord, > > that'd simply accept the device name as an argument and didn't use *any* > > scanning code at all, you'd make a lot of people happy (*). Quite possibly > > everyone minus one man. Which would be a great achievement. > > Since Jens does not seem available anymore do you know how one is > supposed to do the cdrom-ish device enumeration at that point? Is HAL > the official kernel interface to that now? The kernel interface is sysfs and hotplug. Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing the userspace interface. HAL interfaces the above and implements the desktop interface. So for a GUI application it's appropriate to use HAL, while a command line program doesn't need any enumeration, as 'ls /dev/cdrecorder*' should be enough for an experienced user. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vojtech Pavlik; +Cc: linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 07:10:34PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > The kernel interface is sysfs and hotplug. Hotplug, of course, can't be used from a program. As for sysfs, as said in the mail to Jens, I'm not sure how to: - find the devices, what should I scan/filter on. udev seems likes it needs to run a program (/sbin/cdrom_id) or scan /proc/sys/dev/cdrom/info just to know if a device is a cdrom... - find the /dev name associated to a sysfs-found device. > Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns > /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing > the userspace interface. Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to distribution. For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates /dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite number of derivatives do. > HAL interfaces the above and implements the desktop interface. I'm not sure how trustable HAL is at that point given what's going on with udev and I'm not too happy to have to require to daemons (dbus system and hald) to run to find the devices, but heh... OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-26 19:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2006-01-26 19:22 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:21 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:28 ` Diego Calleja 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-26 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert; +Cc: Vojtech Pavlik, linux-kernel >> Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns >> /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing >> the userspace interface. > >Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to >distribution. For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, >/dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates >/dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from >your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to >guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite >number of derivatives do. Plus you have to think about systems not using udev at all. Cheers, chaos preprogrammed. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-26 19:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2006-01-26 19:24 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:22 ` Vojtech Pavlik 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Torokhov @ 2006-01-26 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: Olivier Galibert, Vojtech Pavlik, linux-kernel On 1/26/06, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > >> Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns > >> /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing > >> the userspace interface. > > > >Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to > >distribution. For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, > >/dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates > >/dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from > >your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to > >guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite > >number of derivatives do. > The above can be standatrisized (sp?). How is it different from notmal filesystem naming layout? > Plus you have to think about systems not using udev at all. > Cheers, chaos preprogrammed. > We might want to add a new class in sysfs, except we do not allow a device to belong to several classes (we require splittiing it into sub-devices which is not entirely correct in case of DVD+-RW which should belong to classes CD, DVD, DVD-RW, OTOH maybe it is sane to treat it as 3 different sub-devices in one physical package). -- Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 19:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov @ 2006-01-26 19:24 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dtor_core; +Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 02:07:53PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On 1/26/06, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > >> Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns > > >> /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing > > >> the userspace interface. > > > > > >Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to > > >distribution. For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, > > >/dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates > > >/dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from > > >your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to > > >guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite > > >number of derivatives do. > > > > The above can be standatrisized (sp?). How is it different from notmal > filesystem naming layout? > > > Plus you have to think about systems not using udev at all. > > Cheers, chaos preprogrammed. > > We might want to add a new class in sysfs, except we do not allow a > device to belong to several classes (we require splittiing it into > sub-devices which is not entirely correct in case of DVD+-RW which > should belong to classes CD, DVD, DVD-RW, OTOH maybe it is sane to > treat it as 3 different sub-devices in one > physical package). I don't think there is a reason for a new class. Maybe some attributes, but not a class - they're all the same kind of devices, only plain CD-ROMs can only write CDs at speed 0 ;). -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 19:24 ` Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 19:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-26 19:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vojtech Pavlik; +Cc: dtor_core, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel >I don't think there is a reason for a new class. Maybe some attributes, >but not a class - they're all the same kind of devices, only plain >CD-ROMs can only write CDs at speed 0 ;). CDROMs incapable of handling unknown media sometimes try to spin them with insane speed, so +Inf would be more accurate. ^_^ Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-26 19:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov @ 2006-01-26 19:22 ` Vojtech Pavlik 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 07:38:37PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns > >> /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing > >> the userspace interface. > > > >Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to > >distribution. For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, > >/dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates > >/dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from > >your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to > >guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite > >number of derivatives do. > > Plus you have to think about systems not using udev at all. > Cheers, chaos preprogrammed. Nope. Just let the user specify it. Either the user is experienced enough to know what is the name of the CD recorder on his distro, or he'll use precompiled distribution packages which will have the correct default. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-26 19:21 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:28 ` Diego Calleja 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 07:28:18PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 07:10:34PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > > The kernel interface is sysfs and hotplug. > > Hotplug, of course, can't be used from a program. As for sysfs, as > said in the mail to Jens, I'm not sure how to: > > - find the devices, what should I scan/filter on. udev seems likes it > needs to run a program (/sbin/cdrom_id) or scan > /proc/sys/dev/cdrom/info just to know if a device is a cdrom... > > - find the /dev name associated to a sysfs-found device. That's why I said that sysfs/hotplug are kernel interfaces. They are the interfaces the kernel uses to tell the rest of the system what devices are there. They are by no means interfaces that common tools should use. > > Udev interfaces that and can be set up so that it assigns > > /dev/cdrecorder0, 1, ... to evey recorder in the system, implementing > > the userspace interface. > > Problem is, udev doesn't. Or at least it varies from distribution to > distribution. Yes. That is something that can be fixed, though. It's some work, but it's just that - no controversies involved. > For instance recent gentoo creates /dev/cdrom*, > /dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates > /dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from > your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to > guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite > number of derivatives do. That's what LSB and other standards are for. Defining standard filesystem layout for programs to use (this includes /dev !). And that's what also distros are for - setting correct defaults in the programs when they package them. In the end, on a well done distribution it works. And some time after one is created, the distributions do follow the standard, too. > > HAL interfaces the above and implements the desktop interface. > > I'm not sure how trustable HAL is at that point given what's going on > with udev and I'm not too happy to have to require to daemons (dbus > system and hald) to run to find the devices, but heh... It's mostly required if you run GNOME or KDE, so for desktop applications it makes perfect sense. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-26 19:21 ` Vojtech Pavlik @ 2006-01-26 19:28 ` Diego Calleja 2006-01-26 19:44 ` Olivier Galibert 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Diego Calleja @ 2006-01-26 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert; +Cc: vojtech, linux-kernel El Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:28:18 +0100, Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com> escribió: > - find the devices, what should I scan/filter on. udev seems likes it > needs to run a program (/sbin/cdrom_id) or scan > /proc/sys/dev/cdrom/info just to know if a device is a cdrom... Not at all - /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0f.1/ide1/1.0/media tells that in my box. cdrom_id is, AFAICS, a way to find the capabilities of the drive (ie, look if it's a cdrom or a dvd, etc) You can get the info even with a fancy output: root@estel# systool -v -b ide Bus = "ide" Device = "0.0" Device path = "/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0f.1/ide0/0.0" drivename = "hda" media = "disk" modalias = "ide:m-disk" uevent = <store method only> Device = "1.0" Device path = "/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0f.1/ide1/1.0" drivename = "hdc" media = "cdrom" modalias = "ide:m-cdrom" uevent = <store method only> I guess the cdrom driver could in the future be taught to export more data (the previus cdrom drive is really a dvd drive...) to the sysfs interface to know if it's a dvd so that cdrom_id is unnecesary in some cases. > - find the /dev name associated to a sysfs-found device. HAL tells you that the sysfs path associated to a device. root@estel # hal-get-property --udi '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/block_HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-4163B-K01544H0250' --key 'block.device' /dev/cd-rw root@estel # (yes, that "udi" path sucks) > /dev/cdrw*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdrw*. Fedora core 3 creates > /dev/cdrom*, /dev/cdwriter*, /dev/dvd*, /dev/dvdwriter*. I guess from > your email that SuSE does /dev/cdrecorder*. And I'm not able to > guess what fedora core 5, mandrake, debian, slackware and infinite > number of derivatives do. Although that sucks, IMO the whole point of udev/hal & friends is to be able to make programs work regardless of what the name of the device is (or at least, if I had to use a program, I would like that the program design is good enought that it just ask the system what cd recorders are connected to the system). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 19:28 ` Diego Calleja @ 2006-01-26 19:44 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 20:13 ` Diego Calleja 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Diego Calleja; +Cc: vojtech, linux-kernel On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 08:28:32PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote: > El Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:28:18 +0100, > Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com> escribió: > > > - find the devices, what should I scan/filter on. udev seems likes it > > needs to run a program (/sbin/cdrom_id) or scan > > /proc/sys/dev/cdrom/info just to know if a device is a cdrom... > > Not at all - /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:0f.1/ide1/1.0/media > tells that in my box. cdrom_id is, AFAICS, a way to find the > capabilities of the drive (ie, look if it's a cdrom or a dvd, etc) Hmmm, since when? The most recent kernel with a cdrom attached I have handy is a 2.6.14-rc2, and it does not give a "media" entry. /proc/ide has it though. Of course, I'd hoped the point of sysfs and SG_IO was not to have to care whether it's scsi, ide, usb or something else underlying... > > - find the /dev name associated to a sysfs-found device. > > HAL tells you that the sysfs path associated to a device. > > root@estel # hal-get-property --udi '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/block_HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-4163B-K01544H0250' --key 'block.device' > /dev/cd-rw > root@estel # > > (yes, that "udi" path sucks) Indeed, since the model is not given in sysfs, at least with 2.6.14-rc2 or previous. There too, /proc/ide has it. I also have no idea what that "GSA" thing is either. > Although that sucks, IMO the whole point of udev/hal & friends is to > be able to make programs work regardless of what the name of the device > is (or at least, if I had to use a program, I would like that the program > design is good enought that it just ask the system what cd recorders are > connected to the system). Me too. But at this point it looks like we have to go back to the good old "scan /dev/hd?, /dev/scd*, /dev/sr*, /dev/sg* and pray". Pity. OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 19:44 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-26 20:13 ` Diego Calleja 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Diego Calleja @ 2006-01-26 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert; +Cc: vojtech, gregkh, linux-kernel El Thu, 26 Jan 2006 20:44:02 +0100, Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com> escribió: > Hmmm, since when? The most recent kernel with a cdrom attached I have > handy is a 2.6.14-rc2, and it does not give a "media" entry. 2.6.16-rc1 here > Indeed, since the model is not given in sysfs, at least with > 2.6.14-rc2 or previous. There too, /proc/ide has it. I also have no > idea what that "GSA" thing is either. Oops, I got the command wrong, it can tell you the block device *and* the sysfs path if you use the linux.sysfs_path key (which is non portable key I guess from the name). But anyway, it just looked at udev and it can do the same: root@estel 4/home/diego # udevinfo -q path -n /dev/cd-rw /block/hdc (IOW: /sys/block/hdc) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 16:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 17:55 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-27 14:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-27 16:44 ` James Courtier-Dutton 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-27 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz> wrote: > > The only integrative (and this useful for libscg) interface on Linux is /dev/sg* > > > > /dev/hd* may look nice if you only look skin-deep > > > > How do you e.g. like send SCSI commands to ATAPI tape drives on Linux? > > I see you asking this again and again, and you seem to want to hear this > answer: "You don't." I haven't checked the code, but I guess the SG_IO > interface isn't available there. And I don't think this is a problem, > because a) if it was needed, it can be added trivially with minimum > added code, b) ATAPI tapes are dead, much the way ATAPI floppies are. Nice to see that agree that sending SCSI via /dev/hd* is a hack with limited benefit. Maybe (now that we did agree about the way to go) it makes sense to start discussing which bugs in Linux need to be fixed in order to close e.g. the Bugs in the Debian bug tracking system for cdrtools that are related to the Linux kernel. This are the three most important Linux kernel bugs: - ide-scsi does not do DMA if the DMAsize is not a multiple of 512 A person who knows internal Linux structures shoule be able to fix this (and allow any multiple of 4) in less than one hour. If we sum up the time spend on this discussoion, I really cannot understand why this has not been fixed earlier. - /dev/hd* artificially prevents the ioctls SCSI_IOCTL_GET_IDLUN SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER from returning useful values. As long as this bug is present, there is no way to see SG_IO via /dev/hd* as integral part of the Linux SCSI transport concept. - If sending SCSI sia ATAPI, Linux under certain unknown conditions bastardizes the content of SCSI commands. A possible reason may be that it sends random data in the remainder between the actual SCSI cdb size and the ATAPI SCSI cdb size. ATAPI drives that verify SCSI cdb's for correctness fail in this case. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 14:30 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-27 16:44 ` James Courtier-Dutton 2006-01-27 17:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-30 11:25 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: James Courtier-Dutton @ 2006-01-27 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: no To-header on input, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling wrote: > This are the three most important Linux kernel bugs: > > - ide-scsi does not do DMA if the DMAsize is not a multiple of 512 > A person who knows internal Linux structures shoule be able > to fix this (and allow any multiple of 4) in less than one hour. > If we sum up the time spend on this discussoion, I really cannot > understand why this has not been fixed earlier. > > - /dev/hd* artificially prevents the ioctls SCSI_IOCTL_GET_IDLUN > SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER from returning useful values. > As long as this bug is present, there is no way to see SG_IO > via /dev/hd* as integral part of the Linux SCSI transport concept. > > - If sending SCSI sia ATAPI, Linux under certain unknown conditions > bastardizes the content of SCSI commands. A possible reason may be > that it sends random data in the remainder between the actual > SCSI cdb size and the ATAPI SCSI cdb size. > > ATAPI drives that verify SCSI cdb's for correctness fail in this > case. > > Jörg > Would you be able to add the appropriate kernel bugzilla numbers? I think it might also be useful to make a list of all the SCSI commands that cdrecord uses. Including all the vendor specific ones. One could then verify that the Linux kernel is passing them onto the device correctly. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 16:44 ` James Courtier-Dutton @ 2006-01-27 17:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 11:25 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-27 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Courtier-Dutton Cc: Joerg Schilling, no To-header on input, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan >> This are the three most important Linux kernel bugs: >> >> - ide-scsi does not do DMA if the DMAsize is not a multiple of 512 >> A person who knows internal Linux structures shoule be able >> to fix this (and allow any multiple of 4) in less than one hour. >> If we sum up the time spend on this discussoion, I really cannot >> understand why this has not been fixed earlier. Unfortunately, ide-scsi is deemed obsolete in 2.6, so it looks like no one seems to be willing to do that. About 2.4 I'm just as unsure, because it's in it's way to deep freeze. It might go through as a bugfix, though. >> - /dev/hd* artificially prevents the ioctls SCSI_IOCTL_GET_IDLUN >> SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER from returning useful values. >> As long as this bug is present, there is no way to see SG_IO via >> /dev/hd* as integral part of the Linux SCSI transport concept. Now you're talking shop ;-) Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? >> - If sending SCSI sia ATAPI, Linux under certain unknown conditions >> bastardizes the content of SCSI commands. A possible reason may be >> that it sends random data in the remainder between the actual SCSI >> cdb size and the ATAPI SCSI cdb size. Not so good (the content freakup). IMO, if one can play around with the scsi tunnel (SG_IO) from userspace, commands should get through unmodified. If it's not cdrecord/libscg making my writer do coffee, it must be this modification step. > I think it might also be useful to make a list of all the SCSI commands that > cdrecord uses. Including all the vendor specific ones. One could then verify > that the Linux kernel is passing them onto the device correctly. Or not, for that matter. There is surely a reason for the OS to do something to userspace-provided SG_IO packets to prevent the worst. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 17:01 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 11:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jengelh, James Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > >> This are the three most important Linux kernel bugs: > >> > >> - ide-scsi does not do DMA if the DMAsize is not a multiple of 512 > >> A person who knows internal Linux structures shoule be able > >> to fix this (and allow any multiple of 4) in less than one hour. > >> If we sum up the time spend on this discussoion, I really cannot > >> understand why this has not been fixed earlier. > > Unfortunately, ide-scsi is deemed obsolete in 2.6, so it looks like no one > seems to be willing to do that. About 2.4 I'm just as unsure, because it's > in it's way to deep freeze. It might go through as a bugfix, though. Well, Linux offers a generic SCSI (/dev/sg*) transport, so it should be able to do this in a way that is independent from the SCSI transport. > >> - /dev/hd* artificially prevents the ioctls SCSI_IOCTL_GET_IDLUN > >> SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER from returning useful values. > >> As long as this bug is present, there is no way to see SG_IO via > >> /dev/hd* as integral part of the Linux SCSI transport concept. > > Now you're talking shop ;-) > > Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of > curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked > for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? The drive does not return this information, but the SCSI subsystem creates these instance numbers. A SCSI drive (like a CD/DVD burner) is supposed to be known to the SCSI sub-system and thus needs to have a SCSI subsystem related instance number. > >> - If sending SCSI sia ATAPI, Linux under certain unknown conditions > >> bastardizes the content of SCSI commands. A possible reason may be > >> that it sends random data in the remainder between the actual SCSI > >> cdb size and the ATAPI SCSI cdb size. > > Not so good (the content freakup). IMO, if one can play around with the > scsi tunnel (SG_IO) from userspace, commands should get through unmodified. > If it's not cdrecord/libscg making my writer do coffee, it must be this > modification step. ???? > > I think it might also be useful to make a list of all the SCSI commands that > > cdrecord uses. Including all the vendor specific ones. One could then verify > > that the Linux kernel is passing them onto the device correctly. > > Or not, for that matter. There is surely a reason for the OS to do > something to userspace-provided SG_IO packets to prevent the worst. Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature support. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 12:23 ` Christoph Hellwig 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 17:38 ` Jürg Billeter 2006-01-30 21:02 ` Bill Davidsen 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, James, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-30: > > >> - /dev/hd* artificially prevents the ioctls SCSI_IOCTL_GET_IDLUN > > >> SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER from returning useful values. > > >> As long as this bug is present, there is no way to see SG_IO via > > >> /dev/hd* as integral part of the Linux SCSI transport concept. > > > > Now you're talking shop ;-) > > > > Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of > > curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked > > for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? > > The drive does not return this information, but the SCSI subsystem creates > these instance numbers. A SCSI drive (like a CD/DVD burner) is supposed to > be known to the SCSI sub-system and thus needs to have a SCSI subsystem > related instance number. We are talking about ATA and ATAPI drives here. They may use SCSI commands, but the transport is different. My take is: the Kernel guys have been refusing to invent a non-native enumeration scheme for non-SCSI transports, and you have not provided evidence why this is indispensable. Why is it a *kernel* task to invent SCSI identifier for a non-SCSI transport that does not have such identifiers, in addition to the device name? libscg is already doing it for /dev/hd* and /dev/pg*. How about USB or Firewire or SATA? Do they have ID or LUN? Why isn't libscg simply scanning all transports exhaustively (i. e. not stopping at EPERM) and inventing this itself? You're failing to answer this questions for week now, even though you agreed resmgr or similar setups were safe. How is a user going to tell apart two devices of the same make and model from -scanbus output? The answer is (s)he cannot. Sounds unrealistic? Well, some orchestras sell fresh recordings half an hour after the final chord, with some dozen CD writers... > Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as > it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature > support. Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. dev=/dev/hdc works today. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 12:23 ` Christoph Hellwig 2006-01-30 16:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2006-01-30 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling, jengelh, James, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:04:08PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > Why is it a *kernel* task to invent SCSI identifier for a non-SCSI > transport that does not have such identifiers, in addition to the device > name? libscg is already doing it for /dev/hd* and /dev/pg*. > How about USB or Firewire or SATA? Do they have ID or LUN? Nothing but SPI (parallel scsi) has a target id. Everything that broadly falls under SAM has luns. Because SPI is dying transport the scsi midlayer will get rid of having a mandatory target id mid-term. Relying on the target id to have any useful meaning is dangerous, it doesn't have a really useful meaning on anything but SPI. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 12:23 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2006-01-30 16:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-04 11:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, hch, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:04:08PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > > Why is it a *kernel* task to invent SCSI identifier for a non-SCSI > > transport that does not have such identifiers, in addition to the device > > name? libscg is already doing it for /dev/hd* and /dev/pg*. > > How about USB or Firewire or SATA? Do they have ID or LUN? > > Nothing but SPI (parallel scsi) has a target id. Everything that broadly > falls under SAM has luns. Because SPI is dying transport the scsi > midlayer will get rid of having a mandatory target id mid-term. Relying > on the target id to have any useful meaning is dangerous, it doesn't > have a really useful meaning on anything but SPI. And now please tell me how you believe this will be inplemented..... Every kernel implementation I am aware of uses device instance numbers and BTW: I am open for any non-dogmatic discussion. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:15 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-04 11:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2006-02-04 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, hch, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 05:15:20PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Nothing but SPI (parallel scsi) has a target id. Everything that broadly > > falls under SAM has luns. Because SPI is dying transport the scsi > > midlayer will get rid of having a mandatory target id mid-term. Relying > > on the target id to have any useful meaning is dangerous, it doesn't > > have a really useful meaning on anything but SPI. > > And now please tell me how you believe this will be inplemented..... There's very little places left that need to know about the target id. A few month ago we had a detailed list on linux-scsi, but off my head these are: - sdev_printk prints the device identifier which right now includes the target id. this will become a transport class callout so the transport can print transport-specific information - various scanning interfaces (scsi_scan_host_selected, scsi_scan_target, scsi_add_device) require a channel id. scsi_scan_target will lose the id parameter because it doesn't even need it, the others will move out of the core into the spi transport class or another module for all spi-like drivers, as lots of RAID HBAs want SPI-like scanning - starget_for_each_device does id comparims currently, but it can be changed to iterate the targets parent devices list easily. with those smaller bits the scsi core doesn't need to know about the target id anymore. now all this is rather pointless as you really love your scheme and don't want to change anyway, so let's stop this discussion ;-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 12:23 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 16:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 16:35 ` Jeff Garzik 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as > > it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature > > support. > > Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. > dev=/dev/hdc works today. Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 16:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 16:34 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 16:35 ` Jeff Garzik 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-30: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as > > > it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature > > > support. > > > > Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. > > dev=/dev/hdc works today. > > Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... If you deem fighting your own user base the appropriate behavior to enforce your distorted view on groups that outnumber you by at least five orders of magnitude, go right ahead. But don't complain if you're losing control that way because Albert or somebody else really forks cdrecord then and the fork becomes more popular than the original. cdrecord wouldn't be the first package to see such things happen. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:30 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 16:34 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 17:05 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. > > > dev=/dev/hdc works today. > > > > Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... > > If you deem fighting your own user base the appropriate behavior to > enforce your distorted view on groups that outnumber you by at least > five orders of magnitude, go right ahead. > > But don't complain if you're losing control that way because Albert or > somebody else really forks cdrecord then and the fork becomes more > popular than the original. Many people announced forks in the past, nobody so far did contribute real work... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:34 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 17:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-01 15:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-30: > Many people announced forks in the past, nobody so far did contribute real > work... Only the DVD patches... -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 17:05 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-01 15:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthias Andree; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, linux-kernel, acahalan >> Many people announced forks in the past, nobody so far did contribute real >> work... > >Only the DVD patches... > Which don't always work. I remember SUSE Linux's pomped-up cdrecord-blahdvd thing can't even do DVD-Plus-*, not to mention DVD-DL (some sort of DVD-Plus). Jan Engelhardt -- | Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 16:30 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 16:35 ` Jeff Garzik 2006-01-30 16:46 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jeff Garzik @ 2006-01-30 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: matthias.andree, mrmacman_g4, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Joerg Schilling wrote: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > >>>Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as >>>it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature >>>support. >> >>Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. >>dev=/dev/hdc works today. > > > Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... To burden users with yet another naming policy? Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:35 ` Jeff Garzik @ 2006-01-30 16:46 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-01 15:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 16:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jgarzik Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote: > >>>Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as > >>>it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature > >>>support. > >> > >>Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. > >>dev=/dev/hdc works today. > > > > > > Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... > > To burden users with yet another naming policy? Well, I am open to have an unbiased discussion that may have any result but the parties should allow each other to convince by arguments. The main problem currently is that changes in the Linux kernel did burden cdrecord users and did not cause real benefit. The longer this discussion lasts, the more I lose the hope that it may end in useful results. If you believe that there is still a chance, let us start with a useful discussion or stop it now. I am just tired to see that none of the Linux kernel bugs that cause problems for the cdrecord users have been fixed within the last ~ 3 years. Please understand that I really could use my time for better things than wasting it with useless discussions with people that don't even understand the problems. If you have a proposal that could help, you are welcome. But if there is no way to have an unbiased discussion, just let os stop now. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 16:46 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-01 15:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 17:01 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jgarzik, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; >> >>>Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as >> >>>it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature >> >>>support. >> >> >> >>Right, but evidently it does not need the kernel to invent numbering. >> >>dev=/dev/hdc works today. >> > >> > Maybe, I will need to enforce to use official libscg device names in future.... >> >> To burden users with yet another naming policy? > >Well, I am open to have an unbiased discussion that may have any result but >the parties should allow each other to convince by arguments. > The user should use what the OS uses. Cdrecord, or libscg, respectively, can invent any numbers it wants. IOW, "we" (read: I) would like to see cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc on Linux I am not sure if I understood your other mail on the cdrecord ML, but if the proper syntax would be cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc:@ then /dev/hdc could just be transparently turned into /dev/hdc:@ somewhere within the getopt part. for other OS: cdrecord -dev=/dev/acd0 on FreeBSD cdrecord -dev=E: on Win32 cdrecord -dev=\\cdrom0 if someone really wants for Win32 cdrecord -dev=/dev/c0t0s0d0 on Solaris (Don't shoot me. I unfortunately have to make a guess, since I have not done yet any cdrecord'ing[1] on OS other than Linux.) [1] Well with Nero, but that's not cdrecord, as in "cdrecord'ing". :) Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:06 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 17:01 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 16:17 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-01 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jengelh Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jgarzik, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > The user should use what the OS uses. Cdrecord, or libscg, respectively, > can invent any numbers it wants. IOW, "we" (read: I) would like to see > cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc on Linux Unsupported > I am not sure if I understood your other mail on the cdrecord ML, but if > the proper syntax would be > cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc:@ > then > /dev/hdc > could just be transparently turned into > /dev/hdc:@ > somewhere within the getopt part. See complete description, the :@ is not just for fun.... > for other OS: > cdrecord -dev=/dev/acd0 on FreeBSD Will not work > cdrecord -dev=E: on Win32 Will only wbe doable with mapping effort in a few cases. > cdrecord -dev=\\cdrom0 if someone really wants for Win32 cdrecord dev=cdrom0 works on Solaris because "cdrom0" is a valid nick name for the drive. > cdrecord -dev=/dev/c0t0s0d0 on Solaris May work sometimes. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 17:01 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 16:17 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 11:32 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-02 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jgarzik, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; [-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 949 bytes --] > >> I am not sure if I understood your other mail on the cdrecord ML, but if >> the proper syntax would be >> cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc:@ >> then >> /dev/hdc >> could just be transparently turned into >> /dev/hdc:@ >> somewhere within the getopt part. > >See complete description, the :@ is not just for fun.... > "If the name of the device node that has been speci■ fied on such a system refers to exactly one SCSI device, a shorthand in the form dev= devicename:@ or dev= devicename:@,lun may be used instead of dev= devicename:scsibus,target,lun." So @ is equal to 0,0,0 or 0,0? Threads indicated that every device under linux is "exactly one SCSI device", which is why I was asking for this behind-the-scenes translation of /dev/hdc into /dev/hdc:@. >> for other OS: >> cdrecord -dev=/dev/acd0 on FreeBSD > >Will not work > I think mount uses this syntax (`mount /dev/acd0 /mnt`). Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 16:17 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 11:32 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:45 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 11:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jengelh Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jgarzik, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > >> I am not sure if I understood your other mail on the cdrecord ML, but if > >> the proper syntax would be > >> cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdc:@ > >> then > >> /dev/hdc > >> could just be transparently turned into > >> /dev/hdc:@ > >> somewhere within the getopt part. > > > >See complete description, the :@ is not just for fun.... > > > > "If the name of the device node that has been speciâ? > fied on such a system refers to exactly one SCSI device, a shorthand in > the form dev= devicename:@ or dev= devicename:@,lun may be used instead > of dev= devicename:scsibus,target,lun." > > So @ is equal to 0,0,0 or 0,0? ":@" is a shorthand for ":@,0" which is a shorthand for ":@0,0" There are cases where you may like to use e.g. ":@,3" Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 11:32 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 13:45 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jgarzik, James, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; >> >> So @ is equal to 0,0,0 or 0,0? > >":@" is a shorthand for ":@,0" which is a shorthand for ":@0,0" > >There are cases where you may like to use e.g. ":@,3" > So, since Linux currently does not have anything but ":@,0" per device (device file)... Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 17:38 ` Jürg Billeter 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 21:02 ` Bill Davidsen 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jürg Billeter @ 2006-01-30 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, James, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Hi Jörg On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 12:43 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of > > curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked > > for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? > > The drive does not return this information, but the SCSI subsystem creates > these instance numbers. A SCSI drive (like a CD/DVD burner) is supposed to > be known to the SCSI sub-system and thus needs to have a SCSI subsystem > related instance number. Whenever someone talks about ATAPI drives, you respond with s/ATAPI/SCSI/. Why do you insist that every transport should be used as it was a SCSI bus? ATAPI drives use the same SCSI command set as SCSI drives do, but that won't change the fact that ATAPI drives are not connected to a SCSI bus. It makes sense to address parallel SCSI devices via target id. If an operating system likes to simulate virtual SCSI buses for other bus types as well, ok, I have no objections. But if the operating system doesn't like to simulate virtual SCSI buses and allows applications to address devices by a filename, you should have no objections, too. You and the linux developers just look at the same thing from two perspectives. You seem to like SCSI buses, so you want to look at every bus as it is was a SCSI bus. The linux developers seem to like the principle of looking at single devices without obvious connection to a physical or virtual bus from the application. There is no right or wrong, here, that are just two different perspectives. As the linux developers seem to like their approach - I do as well -, they won't change their system and recommend application developers to use SG_IO on device nodes and ignore the physical bus the devices are connected with. Whatever the interface between cdrecord and libscg is, is obviously your choice. But the libscg backend for linux should follow the recommendations of the linux kernel developers and they recommend to use SG_IO on device nodes, AFAICT. The command line interface of cdrecord is obviously your choice again but IMO it should integrate in the system it currently runs on and as linux command line users know how to deal with device nodes, they want to use them. As you were having the SCSI-only perspective in mind when writing the scanbus functionality, it obviously doesn't fit well in the scheme of the device-based perspective of linux. As there is no virtual parent of all real and virtual SCSI buses in linux, libscg shouldn't try to find one. The linux backend of libscg should just use HAL to enumerate the devices. It would be nice to get a comment whether this makes sense or which statements you don't agree with. Schönen Abend Jürg -- Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 17:38 ` Jürg Billeter @ 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, j Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > Hi Jörg > > On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 12:43 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of > > > curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked > > > for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? > > > > The drive does not return this information, but the SCSI subsystem creates > > these instance numbers. A SCSI drive (like a CD/DVD burner) is supposed to > > be known to the SCSI sub-system and thus needs to have a SCSI subsystem > > related instance number. > > Whenever someone talks about ATAPI drives, you respond with > s/ATAPI/SCSI/. Why do you insist that every transport should be used as > it was a SCSI bus? ATAPI drives use the same SCSI command set as SCSI > drives do, but that won't change the fact that ATAPI drives are not > connected to a SCSI bus. Well, this is simple: it is SCSI. When SCSI started from modifying the SASI (Shugart Asociated System Interface) system around 1984 and at that time come with it's own transport only (a 50 wire cable), this did change soon (around 1986) by introducing transports that use one or two 68 wire cable(s) (16 resp. 32 Bit SCSI). Around 1990, even this did change while ATAPI (ATA Packet Interface) was introduced. Around 1995, the T10 standard group (SCSI) did split up the SCSI standard into a transport specific part and a protocol specific part. SCSI is now using many different transport mechanisms. This is a list of some known SCSI transports: - Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin (what most people call SCSI) - SCSI over fiber optics (e.g. FACL - there are others too) - SCSI over a copper variant of FCAL (used in modern servers) - SCSI over IEEE 1394 (Fire Wire) - SCSI over USB - SCSI over IDE/ATA (ATAPI) - SCSI over TCI/IP (iSCSI) - SCSI over SSCSI (see below) SCSI over Serial SCSI cabling uses the same transport (cable type) as SATA uses. If you buy a SATA HBA card for your PC, you may connect SSCSI & SATA disks to this HBA using the same cables and connectors. So the circle is closing again.... > It makes sense to address parallel SCSI devices via target id. If an > operating system likes to simulate virtual SCSI buses for other bus > types as well, ok, I have no objections. But if the operating system > doesn't like to simulate virtual SCSI buses and allows applications to > address devices by a filename, you should have no objections, too. It seems that you missunderstand this. No operating system uses file names internally. OS instead typically handle SCSI devices that are not connected via an arbitraring Bus like the "Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin" system by asuming they are all on separate SCSI busses that only have one single drive conected each. What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI driver system although it would be apropriate. Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. What cdrecord does with -scanbus is nothing really different. In addition, nobody would ever think about implementing a separate TCP/IP stack for network interfaces that are PPP connections via a modem vs. network interfaces that go via a Ethernet adaptor. Nobody would ever try to convince me that you could save code in the kernel by avoiding the usual network stack as a specific machine may not have Ethernet but a Modem connection only. So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy you to go this way? *] MS-WIN-NT even includes SCSI emulation (it allows you to connect to the SCSI subsystem, set the Address and use SCSI commands from a limited list to read/write sector from ATA only hard disks). If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this way because we do it this way". *] Note that this would need to implement SCSI Generic support for drives that have no native driver in the system. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 12:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Hello Jörg! > It seems that you missunderstand this. No operating system uses file names > internally. That's right. OS kernels usually use pointers for that, which are surely not a reasonable user-space API. On Linux, the user-space API is to address devices by their names. > OS instead typically handle SCSI devices that are not connected > via an arbitraring Bus like the "Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin" system > by asuming they are all on separate SCSI busses that only have one single drive > conected each. > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the > Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI > driver system although it would be apropriate. How exactly does Linux prevent this??? The devices _are_ integrated in a single driver system, at least from the user-space point of view. You can call open() on the device name and then send the appropriate ioctl's. The device names are just strings you shouldn't assume anything about. Feel free to imagine that every device is on its own bus, nothing in the kernel steps in your way. > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified > view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. How do you perform -scanbus for TCP/IP? :-) > In addition, nobody would ever think about implementing a separate TCP/IP stack > for network interfaces that are PPP connections via a modem vs. network > interfaces that go via a Ethernet adaptor. Nobody would ever try to convince > me that you could save code in the kernel by avoiding the usual network stack > as a specific machine may not have Ethernet but a Modem connection only. There is an interesting similarity: in the TCP/IP stack, you also shouldn't assume anything about names of network interfaces, they are just opaque identifiers (in many times assigned by the administrator, not by the kernel). The right way of addressing is by IP addresses or DNS names, which is pretty similar to the addressing of SCSI devices on Linux, isn't it? > If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions > from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] > I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this > way because we do it this way". We do it this way, because we see no sense in fabricating virtual SCSI buses, which do not exist in reality. Also, I don't see a single reason why should I refer to my CD drive by different names depending on whether I am mounting a CDROM and if I am burning a CD. The device is still the same and so should be its name. Scanning for all available CD burners is of course a nice feature, but I don't think it should be implemented by asking all existing SCSI-like devices if they are a CD burner (for example because there can be an almost infinite number of them, given that you can do SCSI-over-IP and other similar tricks). The problem of presenting devices to the users is in no way limited to CD burners or SCSI devices, it's a general problem and I think we should try to find a complete solution. However, the approach libscg uses is clearly not applicable to other domains. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth "Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -- S. Cray ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:41 ` Matthias Andree ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, mj Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Martin Mares <mj@ucw.cz> wrote: > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the > > Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI > > driver system although it would be apropriate. > > How exactly does Linux prevent this??? By not treating ATAPI the same as all other SCSI devices. > > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > > Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified > > view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. > > How do you perform -scanbus for TCP/IP? :-) There are various programs that do that for you. You could e.g. send a ping to the broadcast address in order to find hosts that are on the local network. > > In addition, nobody would ever think about implementing a separate TCP/IP stack > > for network interfaces that are PPP connections via a modem vs. network > > interfaces that go via a Ethernet adaptor. Nobody would ever try to convince > > me that you could save code in the kernel by avoiding the usual network stack > > as a specific machine may not have Ethernet but a Modem connection only. > > There is an interesting similarity: in the TCP/IP stack, you also shouldn't > assume anything about names of network interfaces, they are just opaque > identifiers (in many times assigned by the administrator, not by the kernel). > The right way of addressing is by IP addresses or DNS names, which is > pretty similar to the addressing of SCSI devices on Linux, isn't it? If you understand this, why then insists other people in using names like /dev/hd*? > Scanning for all available CD burners is of course a nice feature, but > I don't think it should be implemented by asking all existing SCSI-like > devices if they are a CD burner (for example because there can be an > almost infinite number of them, given that you can do SCSI-over-IP > and other similar tricks). The problem of presenting devices to the And while this kind of scanning works in case that you have all devices integrated inside a single SCSI implementation, it does not work for ATAPI because someont artificially decided to exclude one single SCSI transport from the global view. And regarding iSCSI, If you like to talk to such a device, you need to authentificate first. This is typically done by the kernel that in turn trnaferres the remote iSCSI device into a virtual local SCSI device. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:41 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-31 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: mj, linux-kernel, acahalan [stripping Cc: list] Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-31: > Martin Mares <mj@ucw.cz> wrote: > > > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the > > > Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI > > > driver system although it would be apropriate. > > > > How exactly does Linux prevent this??? > > By not treating ATAPI the same as all other SCSI devices. Nonsense. cdrecord can access ATAPI devices, fix your libscg device enumeration. > > How do you perform -scanbus for TCP/IP? :-) > > There are various programs that do that for you. > You could e.g. send a ping to the broadcast address in order to find hosts > that are on the local network. Responding to broadcast ping, at least when outside the LAN, is considered a security issue. > > Scanning for all available CD burners is of course a nice feature, but > > I don't think it should be implemented by asking all existing SCSI-like > > devices if they are a CD burner (for example because there can be an > > almost infinite number of them, given that you can do SCSI-over-IP > > and other similar tricks). The problem of presenting devices to the > > And while this kind of scanning works in case that you have all devices > integrated inside a single SCSI implementation, it does not work for ATAPI > because someont artificially decided to exclude one single SCSI transport > from the global view. You need to work around this anyhow because the already-released 2.6 kernels will not be going away in the next 2 - 3 years even if 2.6 were fixed today. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:41 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Hello! > > How exactly does Linux prevent this??? > > By not treating ATAPI the same as all other SCSI devices. Sorry, but that's false. Not treating ATAPI the same can at most complicate it, but in no way prevent. > > How do you perform -scanbus for TCP/IP? :-) > > There are various programs that do that for you. > You could e.g. send a ping to the broadcast address in order to find hosts > that are on the local network. Eh, so you are just going to treate the local network differently? ;-) > If you understand this, why then insists other people in using names like > /dev/hd*? Because at least on Linux, the NAMES are the primary identifier for user space, not numbers of some virtual SCSI buses which don't exist in the real world anyway. For everything else (well, except network interfaces, but that's a different story), we refer by names. Even when using the SCSI devices for other purposes, we refer to them by names. Why should burning a CD be different? I believe that this is the crucial question and the one you should answer first, before trying to force others to share your view of the world. > And while this kind of scanning works in case that you have all devices > integrated inside a single SCSI implementation, it does not work for ATAPI > because someont artificially decided to exclude one single SCSI transport > from the global view. No, you are just wrongly considering something to be a global view, which it in fact isn't. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth How do I type 'for i in *.dvi ; do xdvi $i ; done' in a GUI? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:41 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 21:49 ` Ian Kester-Haney 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mj, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan >> > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. >> > Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified >> > view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. >> >> How do you perform -scanbus for TCP/IP? :-) > >There are various programs that do that for you. >You could e.g. send a ping to the broadcast address in order to find hosts >that are on the local network. ping is ICMP/IP, therefore is not relevant to the question ;) `nmap -sT` would probably do more TCP. >If you understand this, why then insists other people in using names like >/dev/hd*? It's shorter than /dev/c0t0d0s0? Well, I think it's because people think in terms of connectors (my drive is IDE therefore it must be hdc) rather than protocol (my drive does ATAPI therefore it must be /dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0). Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 21:49 ` Ian Kester-Haney 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Ian Kester-Haney @ 2006-02-01 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Shouldn't actively developed applications use the current methods for accessing ddevices on target operating systems. It seems to me that linux/gnu users are moving away from cdrecord and it ilk because of the artificial limitations imposed by its libscg counterpart. Backward compatibility is being phased out in the linux kernel to allow for better ways to access and use devices in the system. While the technical nature of transport specifications might be tracked down to an underlying SCSI mechanism, it is by no means an exclusive deal. Perhaps linux doesn't need cdrecord and this whole mess will go away. Real users don't care as long as it works, even the old kernel used /dev/* names. Give it up. --------------------------------------------- Only morons respond to flames guilty as charged ---------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 21:49 ` Ian Kester-Haney @ 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 9:54 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 10:14 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jengelh Cc: mrmacman_g4, mj, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > It's shorter than /dev/c0t0d0s0? Well, I think it's because people think > in terms of connectors (my drive is IDE therefore it must be hdc) rather > than protocol (my drive does ATAPI therefore it must be > /dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0). Is there any reason why the people with small PCs should dominate the people with big machines? If you use /dev/hd*, you loose control after you add more than ~ 6-10 disks. The systematical attempt is easy to remember even with a big amount of external hardware. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 9:54 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 10:14 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan Hello! > Is there any reason why the people with small PCs should dominate the > people with big machines? > > If you use /dev/hd*, you loose control after you add more than ~ 6-10 disks. And this is why the current Linux naming scheme (udev etc.) gives you the possibility to use both types of names. When I have a single CD writer, it's silly to have to think about where exactly it is connected. I refer to it as /dev/cdrw and everything is easy. When I have multiple writers, I start to care about more -- but usually it's still better to avoid using bus addresses (they are not too stable -- after changing disks, I often end up with connecting my 2 CDWR's to different controllers) and use udev to maintain stable naming. I use /dev/cdrom-upper and /dev/cdrom-lower, which are assigned based on manufacturer and serial number. This is even easier to remember with a big amount of hardware :-) And, which is more important, this scheme works for everything -- drives, mice, network interfaces and so on. I don't see any reason why cdrecord on Linux should invent a different naming scheme, especially as nobody has so far demonstrated any of its advantages. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth MIPS: Meaningless Indicator of Processor Speed. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 9:54 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 10:14 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, mrmacman_g4, mj, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-02: > Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > It's shorter than /dev/c0t0d0s0? Well, I think it's because people think > > in terms of connectors (my drive is IDE therefore it must be hdc) rather > > than protocol (my drive does ATAPI therefore it must be > > /dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0). > > Is there any reason why the people with small PCs should dominate the > people with big machines? No side should dominate. > If you use /dev/hd*, you loose control after you add more than ~ 6-10 disks. I don't see how a letter such as /dev/hdo /dev/hdp /dev/hdq is much different than an opaque number tuple as 1,15,0 1,16,0 1,17,0... either is a string with systematic generation, and that's about it. I'm still wondering why mtst (mid-layer access to control tape drives) is happy with /dev/nst0 nst1 ... (device name) and cdrecord (or its author) isn't. cdrecord or libscg should be agnostic of these schemas and take any opaque string that works properly for the given system without complaining. It can invent any numbering scheme it likes, but requesting that the kernel does it if it has no further use for it is barking up the wrong tree. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 12:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 12:24 ` jerome lacoste ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-01-31 12:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On 1/31/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > > > Hi Jörg > > > > On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 12:43 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > > Hm, this ATAPI stuff makes me a headache. Well, anyway, out of > > > > curiosity, what is an ATAPI drive (IDE-ATAPI) supposed to return when asked > > > > for bus number, id or lun - independent of OS and/or cdrecord? > > > > > > The drive does not return this information, but the SCSI subsystem creates > > > these instance numbers. A SCSI drive (like a CD/DVD burner) is supposed to > > > be known to the SCSI sub-system and thus needs to have a SCSI subsystem > > > related instance number. > > > > Whenever someone talks about ATAPI drives, you respond with > > s/ATAPI/SCSI/. Why do you insist that every transport should be used as > > it was a SCSI bus? ATAPI drives use the same SCSI command set as SCSI > > drives do, but that won't change the fact that ATAPI drives are not > > connected to a SCSI bus. > > Well, this is simple: it is SCSI. > > When SCSI started from modifying the SASI (Shugart Asociated System Interface) > system around 1984 and at that time come with it's own transport only > (a 50 wire cable), this did change soon (around 1986) by introducing > transports that use one or two 68 wire cable(s) (16 resp. 32 Bit SCSI). > > Around 1990, even this did change while ATAPI (ATA Packet Interface) was > introduced. > > Around 1995, the T10 standard group (SCSI) did split up the SCSI standard > into a transport specific part and a protocol specific part. SCSI is now using > many different transport mechanisms. > > This is a list of some known SCSI transports: > > - Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin (what most people call SCSI) > - SCSI over fiber optics (e.g. FACL - there are others too) > - SCSI over a copper variant of FCAL (used in modern servers) > - SCSI over IEEE 1394 (Fire Wire) > - SCSI over USB > - SCSI over IDE/ATA (ATAPI) > - SCSI over TCI/IP (iSCSI) > - SCSI over SSCSI (see below) > > SCSI over Serial SCSI cabling uses the same transport (cable type) as SATA uses. > If you buy a SATA HBA card for your PC, you may connect SSCSI & SATA > disks to this HBA using the same cables and connectors. > > So the circle is closing again.... > > > > It makes sense to address parallel SCSI devices via target id. If an > > operating system likes to simulate virtual SCSI buses for other bus > > types as well, ok, I have no objections. But if the operating system > > doesn't like to simulate virtual SCSI buses and allows applications to > > address devices by a filename, you should have no objections, too. > > It seems that you missunderstand this. No operating system uses file names > internally. OS instead typically handle SCSI devices that are not connected > via an arbitraring Bus like the "Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin" system > by asuming they are all on separate SCSI busses that only have one single drive > conected each. > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the > Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI > driver system although it would be apropriate. > > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified > view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. What cdrecord does with > -scanbus is nothing really different. Yes and it is Linux limitation (lets face it). There are 2 problems: * no generic block layer transport infrastructure so that you cannot specify in the low-level driver which transport types your device does support (this information would be exported to the applications). Jens, maybe sysfs attribute "transports" will be sufficient so that application can use libsysfs to get full list of devices supporting "SCSI" transport (/dev/hd* is fine with this scheme). Does it make sense? Having block layer sysfs attributes for device type (disk, tape, cd etc) would have additional bonus of not needing to inquire wrong device types. This would probably simplify other applications (HAL?). [ These are just quick ideas... ] Joerg, I don't see any sense in providing users with fake SCSI lun and bus numbers for ATAPI devices. I think that what users would like is the list of devices consisting of "fd" and actual vendor name of device (+ optionally serial no + optionally "x:y:z" for real SCSI). Nobody wants to see some artificial "x:y:z" for her/his ATAPI device (it has always annoyed me in Windows), not to say that the majority of desktop users have absolutely no idea of meaning of these numbers. * ide-* drivers for ATAPI devices are needed (some devices just doesn't work with ide-scsi ATM) so please accept this fact that we cannot just now simply switch over everything to using ide-scsi and we have to use SG_IO ioctl for ide-cd (and ide-{floppy,tape} if anybody cares to add support for it). I'm not saying this won't change in future but this requires doing actual work and people seem to be more interested in discussing stupid naming issues than doing it so... > In addition, nobody would ever think about implementing a separate TCP/IP stack > for network interfaces that are PPP connections via a modem vs. network > interfaces that go via a Ethernet adaptor. Nobody would ever try to convince > me that you could save code in the kernel by avoiding the usual network stack > as a specific machine may not have Ethernet but a Modem connection only. > > So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard > SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? SCSI protocol stack is far too Parallel SCSI centric (vide SAS flamewar). Once again this is Linux problem which will get fixed with time or will fix itself if we switch to libata for PATA. > Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, > ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy > you to go this way? Linux needs to be better, no? ;-) > *] MS-WIN-NT even includes SCSI emulation (it allows you to connect to the > SCSI subsystem, set the Address and use SCSI commands from a limited list > to read/write sector from ATA only hard disks). > > If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions > from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] > I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this > way because we do it this way". The answer is - we do this this way because of historical reasons and we simply lack resources to change it immediately (be it your "everything is SCSI" or mine "block layer devices claiming supported transport types"). Please also note things don't change because you say so - they require somebody doing actual work and work/time is not free (despite what some people think). If you think that badmouthing Linux will motivate people to work, you are wrong (it has the opposite effect of time wasting flamewars). I would like you to ask to remove warnings from about /dev/hd* interface from cdrecored - they are just confusing users. This is the current way of doing things in Linux and applications have to deal with it for now. Thanks, Bartlomiej > *] Note that this would need to implement SCSI Generic support for drives that > have no native driver in the system. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Matthias Andree ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, bzolnier Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> wrote: > Joerg, I don't see any sense in providing users with fake SCSI > lun and bus numbers for ATAPI devices. I think that what users > would like is the list of devices consisting of "fd" and actual vendor > name of device (+ optionally serial no + optionally "x:y:z" for real > SCSI). Nobody wants to see some artificial "x:y:z" for her/his > ATAPI device (it has always annoyed me in Windows), not to say > that the majority of desktop users have absolutely no idea of meaning > of these numbers. This is called integration and it is done by Linux e.g. for 1394 and USB SCSI devices. So why not for ATAPI? > * ide-* drivers for ATAPI devices are needed (some devices just doesn't > work with ide-scsi ATM) so please accept this fact that we cannot just > now simply switch over everything to using ide-scsi and we have to use > SG_IO ioctl for ide-cd (and ide-{floppy,tape} if anybody cares to add > support for it). I'm not saying this won't change in future but this requires > doing actual work and people seem to be more interested in discussing > stupid naming issues than doing it so... Well, the problem with ide-scsi is not a general one but caused by a simple bug that needs to be fixed. > > So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard > > SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? > > SCSI protocol stack is far too Parallel SCSI centric (vide SAS flamewar). > Once again this is Linux problem which will get fixed with time or will fix > itself if we switch to libata for PATA. If this is true for Linux, it should be fixed. But this is not a general problem. > > Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, > > ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy > > you to go this way? > > Linux needs to be better, no? ;-) In case that Linux would offer better methods, I would not complain. > > If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions > > from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] > > I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this > > way because we do it this way". > > The answer is - we do this this way because of historical reasons and we > simply lack resources to change it immediately (be it your "everything is > SCSI" or mine "block layer devices claiming supported transport types"). This is obviously not true: There _was_ (and still is) a useful implementation with minor bugs. But instead of fixing the minor bugs, a lot of work has been done to introduce a new and unneded new interface. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:49 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 14:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-31 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: bzolnier, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-01-31: > > Linux needs to be better, no? ;-) > > In case that Linux would offer better methods, I would not complain. Well, you are closing your eyes before these methods. I'm not going to repeat that. I suggest that the discussion end here because you are evidently unwilling to look at the pointers you were given. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-31 13:49 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 14:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: bzolnier, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Hello! > This is obviously not true: There _was_ (and still is) a useful implementation > with minor bugs. But instead of fixing the minor bugs, a lot of work has been > done to introduce a new and unneded new interface. Some would say that ide-scsi is the thing which was new and unneeded. The ide-cd driver was there first. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth Even nostalgia isn't what it used to be. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:49 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 14:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-01 15:34 ` Jan Engelhardt 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-01-31 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan On 1/31/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Joerg, I don't see any sense in providing users with fake SCSI > > lun and bus numbers for ATAPI devices. I think that what users > > would like is the list of devices consisting of "fd" and actual vendor > > name of device (+ optionally serial no + optionally "x:y:z" for real > > SCSI). Nobody wants to see some artificial "x:y:z" for her/his > > ATAPI device (it has always annoyed me in Windows), not to say > > that the majority of desktop users have absolutely no idea of meaning > > of these numbers. > > This is called integration and it is done by Linux e.g. for 1394 and USB SCSI > devices. So why not for ATAPI? Because we have native drivers which do not require SCSI stack et all. > > * ide-* drivers for ATAPI devices are needed (some devices just doesn't > > work with ide-scsi ATM) so please accept this fact that we cannot just > > now simply switch over everything to using ide-scsi and we have to use > > SG_IO ioctl for ide-cd (and ide-{floppy,tape} if anybody cares to add > > support for it). I'm not saying this won't change in future but this requires > > doing actual work and people seem to be more interested in discussing > > stupid naming issues than doing it so... > > Well, the problem with ide-scsi is not a general one but caused by a simple > bug that needs to be fixed. Please _reread_ this paragraph: * some devices (not cd-writers) doesn't work with ide-scsi * they require quirks which are in ide-cd so it ide-cd needs to stay as a driver * if is very useful if cd-writing can be done with ide-cd and without SCSI stack (a hack but very useful one) [ more below ] > > > If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions > > > from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] > > > I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this > > > way because we do it this way". > > > > The answer is - we do this this way because of historical reasons and we > > simply lack resources to change it immediately (be it your "everything is > > SCSI" or mine "block layer devices claiming supported transport types"). > > This is obviously not true: There _was_ (and still is) a useful implementation > with minor bugs. But instead of fixing the minor bugs, a lot of work has been > done to introduce a new and unneded new interface. >From technical point of view: pros: * you don't need SCSI stack (a lot of code saved!) * you use subsystem native driver (a lot of complexity with locking etc avoided!) * you don't need to provide users with fake data (SCSI lun and bus) cons: * user-space applications need to support it What are the _technical_ problems with SG_IO interface besides issue with enumaration of devices available in the system? I know that you don't like SG_IO but it is hardly technical argument. Thanks, Bartlomiej ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 14:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-02-01 15:34 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:49 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan >> >> This is called integration and it is done by Linux e.g. for 1394 and USB SCSI >> devices. So why not for ATAPI? > >Because we have native drivers which do not require SCSI stack et all. > >* if [ED: it] is very useful if cd-writing can be done with ide-cd and without > SCSI stack (a hack but very useful one) >* you don't need SCSI stack (a lot of code saved!) Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code floating around? Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:34 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:49 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-02-01 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan On 2/1/06, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > >> > >> This is called integration and it is done by Linux e.g. for 1394 and USB SCSI > >> devices. So why not for ATAPI? > > > >Because we have native drivers which do not require SCSI stack et all. > > > >* if [ED: it] is very useful if cd-writing can be done with ide-cd and without > > SCSI stack (a hack but very useful one) > >* you don't need SCSI stack (a lot of code saved!) > > > Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. > > If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used > without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code > floating around? No, because this code belongs to the block layer (scsi_ioctl.c) and is shared between SCSI and IDE drivers. BTW This was already at least once explained in this thread. Bartlomiej ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:34 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:49 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree ` (3 more replies) 1 sibling, 4 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jengelh, bzolnier Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. > > If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used > without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code > floating around? CONFIG_SCSI??? Why not using fully dynamical loadable kernel modules as done with Solaris since 1992? Since that time nobody cares because what you need is auto-loaded on demand and there is absolutely no need for a manual configuration. BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a lot of code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of unneeded code in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few KB (less than 30k on Solaris). Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 11:28 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 10:21 ` Martin Mares ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: bzolnier, linux-kernel Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-02: > Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. > > > > If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used > > without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code > > floating around? > > CONFIG_SCSI??? > > Why not using fully dynamical loadable kernel modules as done with Solaris > since 1992? Since that time nobody cares because what you need is auto-loaded > on demand and there is absolutely no need for a manual configuration. You mean: Module Size Used by ... scsi_transport_spi 20864 1 sym53c8xx scsi_mod 131304 7 st,sr_mod,sg,sym53c8xx,scsi_transport_spi,libata,sd_mod ... autoloaded on boot, and scsi_mod has verbose sense strings built in (call it bloat, but on a Peeceeh a few kB don't hurt). libata is Linux's SATA driver, still under development but quite solid for some chips, such as via 82*. Chances are that adding PATA to libata (which is planned or in the works) obsoletes your whole ATAPI ide-* module arguments, sym53c8xx - no surprise - the host adaptor driver, sr/sd_mod the CD-ROM and disk block drivers, st and sg tape and generic drivers. > BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a lot of > code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of unneeded code > in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few KB (less than 30k on > Solaris). You've been stating this oft enough now. It won't change in a day even if you post this every hour. Please cease posting the same stuff over and over again. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 11:28 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 12:46 ` Martin Mares 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: linux-kernel, bzolnier Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a lot of > > code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of unneeded code > > in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few KB (less than 30k on > > Solaris). > > You've been stating this oft enough now. It won't change in a day even > if you post this every hour. Please cease posting the same stuff over > and over again. Why do you repeat posting false claims over and over? May be we should really stop this thread. Unless I see any move towards a more realistic way of looking at things it does not make sense to repeat things and short time later I will see the same unadequate replies as I did see days before. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:28 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 12:46 ` Martin Mares 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 12:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, bzolnier Hello Joerg! > > > BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a lot of > > > code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of unneeded code > > > in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few KB (less than 30k on > > > Solaris). > > > > You've been stating this oft enough now. It won't change in a day even > > if you post this every hour. Please cease posting the same stuff over > > and over again. > > Why do you repeat posting false claims over and over? This is getting ridiculous. Point to a single false claim in the mail you were replying to. The only claim there was that you are posting the same stuff again and again, and it is obviously true, as can be demostrated by anybody who can use grep. > Unless I see any move towards a more realistic way of looking at things > it does not make sense to repeat things and short time later I will see > the same unadequate replies as I did see days before. Yes. You have been repeatedly asked to produce any sound arguments why the current interface is bad. So far, you have produced none. You have only written about Linux not following your personal model of virtual SCSI buses, which is maybe a good argument for supporting your dislike for Linux, but nothing else. Also, you mentioned several phantoms like IDE tapes, which nobody seems to care about, a couple of bugs which the driver developers were willing to fix if you tell how to reproduce them. Finally, you mentioned problems with scanning and you were told that: (1) the current scanning code in libscg works at least for all currently existing transports, if a trivial bug is fixed, (2) for a complete view of the available HW, you should use the HAL, (3) most people prefer either using a GUI interface which converges to using HAL anyway, or refer to devices by their names. The rest was just hand-waving. The interface preferred by Linux has changed for very good reasons, and a number of such reasons has been demonstrated. Also, it's not changing daily, the switchover from emulating SCSI to performing SG_IO directly on /dev/hd* was the only big change in last 10 years. So unless anybody has any new arguments for either approach, let's end this thread. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside a dog, it's too dark to read. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 10:21 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 13:18 ` Jens Axboe 2006-02-02 16:12 ` Jan Engelhardt 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, bzolnier, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan Hello! > Why not using fully dynamical loadable kernel modules as done with Solaris > since 1992? Since that time nobody cares because what you need is auto-loaded > on demand and there is absolutely no need for a manual configuration. Yes, but it still eats the memory if loaded. > BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a lot of > code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of unneeded code > in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few KB (less than 30k on > Solaris). Please stop beating a dead horse and diverting this discussion to irrelevant implementation details. What we were (and should be) discussing are the interfaces. If you have any sound arguments against the current interface, speak up. Whether the interface leads to code duplication is neither yours nor mine to judge -- the only people who should care are the maintainers of the drivers and they seem to be happy with the current approach and they are willing to improve it to simplify scanning. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- D.E.K. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 10:21 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 13:18 ` Jens Axboe 2006-02-02 16:12 ` Jan Engelhardt 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-02-02 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, bzolnier, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan On Thu, Feb 02 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. > > > > If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used > > without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code > > floating around? > > CONFIG_SCSI??? > > Why not using fully dynamical loadable kernel modules as done with > Solaris since 1992? Since that time nobody cares because what you need > is auto-loaded on demand and there is absolutely no need for a manual > configuration. > > BTW: Introducing an orthogonal SCSI based implementation would save a > lot of code. The model currently used on Linux is duplicating a lot of > unneeded code in target drivers and the SCSI glue code is only a few > KB (less than 30k on Solaris). I have to comment on that... Your original gripe was the we should not have so much duplicated code - which of course was shot down, we don't have much duplicated code, basically a few hundred lines at most. And that solely remains because /dev/sg* still exists and isn't fully integrated with bsg (the block layer sg, which is probably misnamed as it could be used char devices as well). So this mail from you basically shoots huge holes in your original gripe. The whole SCSI stack is redundant code in this scheme. A quick check over my current tree shows over 23 _thousand_ lines of code (SCSI stack + ide-scsi)! Auto-loading modules has _nothing_ to do with it, it's still redundant code. I could go on, but the point should be crystal clear already so I'll stop. Joerg, unless you have any technical arguments please stop this thread. And here I do mean ones that are correct. You repeatedly either ignore mails asking you to backup your claims - or you reply to them saying "Please stop making false claims!". Honestly, I have no idea why you are doing that. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2006-02-02 13:18 ` Jens Axboe @ 2006-02-02 16:12 ` Jan Engelhardt 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-02 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: bzolnier, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan >> Which unfortunately leads us back to one of the early questions. >> >> If ATAPI is some sort of SCSI [command set] over ATA, and ide-cd can be used >> without the "Big Bad" SCSI layer (CONFIG_SCSI), don't we have redundant code >> floating around? > >CONFIG_SCSI??? > What else? >Why not using fully dynamical loadable kernel modules as done with Solaris Do you think I have scsi built-in? Not at all. lsmod:: sg 20120 0 sd_mod 12304 0 usb_storage 73408 0 usbcore 108256 5 uhci_hcd,ohci_hcd,ehci_hcd,usb_storage scsi_mod 103496 3 sg,sd_mod,usb_storage /proc/config.gz: CONFIG_SCSI=m CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=m # CONFIG_CHR_DEV_ST is not set # CONFIG_CHR_DEV_OSST is not set CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=m # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR is not set CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SG=m CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SCH=m CONFIG_SCSI_CONSTANTS=y that's about all. >since 1992? Since that time nobody cares because what you need is auto-loaded >on demand and there is absolutely no need for a manual configuration. Jan Engelhardt -- | Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 12:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-01-31 12:24 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-31 12:33 ` Oliver Neukum 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter 2006-01-31 16:43 ` Paul Jakma 4 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-31 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On 1/31/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: [...] > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. The Linux users (I know of) like to be able to reference their drives the way their Operating System names them. If it's /dev/cdrw, then it's /dev/cdrw, not '1,0,0'. Should we make a poll ? Jerome ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:24 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-31 12:33 ` Oliver Neukum 2006-01-31 12:44 ` Denis Vlasenko 2006-02-02 7:59 ` Xavier Bestel 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Oliver Neukum @ 2006-01-31 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jerome lacoste Cc: Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Am Dienstag, 31. Januar 2006 13:24 schrieb jerome lacoste: > On 1/31/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > [...] > > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > > The Linux users (I know of) like to be able to reference their drives > the way their Operating System names them. > > If it's /dev/cdrw, then it's /dev/cdrw, not '1,0,0'. > > Should we make a poll ? It is entirely possible that the people you know are far from a representative sample. Most people likely prefer clicking on a description in a GUI. There needs to be a way to get this list and if possible it should not be specific to Linux. Regards Oliver ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:33 ` Oliver Neukum @ 2006-01-31 12:44 ` Denis Vlasenko 2006-02-01 15:37 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-02 7:59 ` Xavier Bestel 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Denis Vlasenko @ 2006-01-31 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Oliver Neukum Cc: jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On Tuesday 31 January 2006 14:33, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Dienstag, 31. Januar 2006 13:24 schrieb jerome lacoste: > > On 1/31/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > > [...] > > > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > > > > The Linux users (I know of) like to be able to reference their drives > > the way their Operating System names them. > > > > If it's /dev/cdrw, then it's /dev/cdrw, not '1,0,0'. > > > > Should we make a poll ? > > It is entirely possible that the people you know are far from a representative > sample. Most people likely prefer clicking on a description in a GUI. There > needs to be a way to get this list and if possible it should not be specific > to Linux. Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? So far I was perfectly happy with just /dev/hd[a-z][0-9]* -- vda ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:44 ` Denis Vlasenko @ 2006-02-01 15:37 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch 2006-02-01 15:56 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denis Vlasenko Cc: Oliver Neukum, jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan >> > If it's /dev/cdrw, then it's /dev/cdrw, not '1,0,0'. >> > >> > Should we make a poll ? select(), poll(), epoll(), anyone? (SCNR) >Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? > AFAICS, we do. hda is always primary slave, etc. With the SCSI layer it's (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the first disk inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:37 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch 2006-02-02 15:24 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-01 15:56 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Bernd Petrovitsch @ 2006-02-01 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Denis Vlasenko, Oliver Neukum, jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 16:37 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: [...] > >Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? > > > AFAICS, we do. hda is always primary slave, etc. With the SCSI layer it's > (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the first disk > inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) The (historical) reason was: There were not enough major/minor numbers (IIRC 8 bit for each of them) for a sane (and static) SCSI device number mapping (similar to IDE) - just multiply the possible # of partitions * # of LUNs * # IDs for a few controllers. Bernd -- Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 Embedded Linux Development and Services ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch @ 2006-02-02 15:24 ` Albert Cahalan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-02 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bernd Petrovitsch; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On 2/1/06, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@firmix.at> wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 16:37 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > [...] > > >Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? > > > > > AFAICS, we do. hda is always primary slave, etc. With the SCSI layer it's > > (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the first disk > > inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) > > The (historical) reason was: There were not enough major/minor numbers > (IIRC 8 bit for each of them) for a sane (and static) SCSI device number > mapping (similar to IDE) - just multiply the possible # of partitions * > # of LUNs * # IDs for a few controllers. It's a hashing problem, and should have originally been seen as such. The constraints are that you'd like some stability as devices come and go. Splitting /dev into fields could have worked nicely: 1. the partition 2. dev type: disk, CD-ROM, built-in (ramdisk,loop), other 3. physical: master/slave, SCSI target, IDE 1/2/other, "is USB"... 4. volatile+rare stuff: PCI slot, ISA address, USB position, LUN (needlessly crammed into 16 bits: 5:2:4:5 or 5:2:5:4) For the physical stuff, per-driver values are assigned explicitly in the source code. Collisions are determined by humans. We make USB collide with something old, like XT disks and Atari disks. Collisions are chosen so that normal machines are unlikely to suffer from them. Note that I use "IDE 1/2/other". Only an x86 PC can have a primary or secondary controller, as determined by IO port location. Macs just have "other", as a single value. (they differentiate based on the rare and volatile stuff as needed) USB is distinguished from SCSI, FireWire, and IDE unless delibrately made to collide because of a bit shortage. Collisions found at run-time are resolved by mucking with the field for volatile and rare stuff. Adding a new USB device can will probably not mess up a different USB device, because the hashing is not too likely to pick the same number. Adding a new USB device will certainly not mess up a non-USB device unless the non-USB device is in a class of physical devices that was delibrately made to collide with USB. Adding a SCSI device with target ID 4 will only stand a chance of messing up other SCSI devices with target ID 4, on other busses or with other LUNs. It wouldn't mess up SCSI target ID 3, FireWire, USB, or anything else UNLESS those share the "physical" field ID. Not that Joerg would like this: LUN values and bus numbers get tossed into a hash function. You can't recover the individual numbers. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:37 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch @ 2006-02-01 15:56 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-01 16:28 ` Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-02-01 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Denis Vlasenko, Oliver Neukum, jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan On 2/1/06, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > >> > If it's /dev/cdrw, then it's /dev/cdrw, not '1,0,0'. > >> > > >> > Should we make a poll ? > > select(), poll(), epoll(), anyone? (SCNR) > > >Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? > > > AFAICS, we do. hda is always primary slave, etc. With the SCSI layer it's Ehm, primary master and it is not true if you are using host drivers as modules. Moreover providing ordering by IDE driver has been nightmare to maintain and can't be done correctly for 100% weird cases. > (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the first disk > inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) Which is much saner approach from developers' POV. Bartlomiej ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 15:56 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2006-02-01 16:28 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 17:51 ` Kyle Moffett 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Denis Vlasenko, Oliver Neukum, jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan >> >Do we need to expose IDE master/slave, primary/secondary concepts in Linux? >> > >> AFAICS, we do. hda is always primary slave, etc. With the SCSI layer it's > >Ehm, primary master and it is not true if you are using host drivers as modules. > Whoops, you are right. However, even with, say, an extra PCI IDE controller, the ordering of the drives within that controller is "as usual", e.g. the order is "pri ma","pri sl","sec ma","sec sl", of course relative to the start of the respective controller. >Moreover providing ordering by IDE driver has been nightmare to maintain >and can't be done correctly for 100% weird cases. So how much weird cases do we have? >> (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the first disk >> inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) > >Which is much saner approach from developers' POV. > Developer... and about the user/admin? With a sparcbox (ran suse linux 7.3 the last time it was powered on - 2.4 kernel, no udev - don't complain :), replugging disks in put them at the end of the 'sd*' naming chain, effectively killing the features of hotplug the machine itself offered. (Oh, that OS starting with S.. managed it with the help of the behated/-loved c?d?t?s? scheme, but that's OT.) Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 16:28 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 17:51 ` Kyle Moffett 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-02-01 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Denis Vlasenko, Oliver Neukum, jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan On Feb 01, 2006, at 11:28, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> Moreover providing ordering by IDE driver has been nightmare to >> maintain and can't be done correctly for 100% weird cases. > > So how much weird cases do we have? Speaking from personal experience, _waay_ too many. On my old G4 which now serves as a fileserver, I have 5 IDE busses out of 3 controllers (Onboard ATA-66 with 2 busses, onboard ATA-33 with one bus, add-in PCI ATA-100 with 2 busses) There's a _config_ option to control probe order specific to the two Apple onboard interfaces, and it used to be (before udev) that option was a nightmare to ensure that my new kernel has the same probe order as the old one. Once you throw PCI hotplug into the mix, reliable probing order is impossible, and you should just use udev to dynamically assign names. >>> (surprisingly) the other way round, sda just happens to be the >>> first disk >>> inserted (SCA, USB, etc.) >> >> Which is much saner approach from developers' POV. > > Developer... and about the user/admin? With a sparcbox (ran suse > linux 7.3 the last time it was powered on - 2.4 kernel, no udev - > don't complain :), replugging disks in put them at the end of the > 'sd*' naming chain, effectively killing the features of hotplug the > machine itself offered. (Oh, that OS starting with S.. managed it > with the help of the behated/-loved c?d?t?s? scheme, but that's OT.) Yeah, 2.4 was bad at hotplug, everybody knows that already. This is why the changes were made for 2.6 to add udev and hal and make it much saner. Cheers, Kyle Moffett -- I lost interest in "blade servers" when I found they didn't throw knives at people who weren't supposed to be in your machine room. -- Anthony de Boer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:33 ` Oliver Neukum 2006-01-31 12:44 ` Denis Vlasenko @ 2006-02-02 7:59 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 11:19 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Oliver Neukum Cc: jerome lacoste, Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 13:33, Oliver Neukum wrote: > It is entirely possible that the people you know are far from a representative > sample. Most people likely prefer clicking on a description in a GUI. There > needs to be a way to get this list and if possible it should not be specific > to Linux. As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. nautilus-cd-burner). Xav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 7:59 ` Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 11:19 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:34 ` Xavier Bestel 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xavier.bestel, oliver Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 13:33, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > It is entirely possible that the people you know are far from a representative > > sample. Most people likely prefer clicking on a description in a GUI. There > > needs to be a way to get this list and if possible it should not be specific > > to Linux. > > As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and > it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. > nautilus-cd-burner). The fact that people here repeat unadquate proposals forces me to repeat my proposals. Name a list fo OS that implement HAL and then look at the list of crecord supported platforms Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:19 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 11:34 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 16:20 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 12:19, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 13:33, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > It is entirely possible that the people you know are far from a representative > > > sample. Most people likely prefer clicking on a description in a GUI. There > > > needs to be a way to get this list and if possible it should not be specific > > > to Linux. > > > > As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and > > it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. > > nautilus-cd-burner). > > The fact that people here repeat unadquate proposals forces me to repeat my > proposals. Name a list fo OS that implement HAL and then look at the list > of crecord supported platforms Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by libscg. Xav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:34 ` Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 13:02 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 13:24 ` grundig 2006-02-02 16:20 ` Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xavier.bestel, schilling Cc: oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > > > As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and > > > it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. > > > nautilus-cd-burner). > > > > The fact that people here repeat unadquate proposals forces me to repeat my > > proposals. Name a list fo OS that implement HAL and then look at the list > > of crecord supported platforms > > Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by > libscg. Libscg is _the_ HAL for cdrecord. It is availaible the same way as today since 10 years. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 13:02 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-03 9:55 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 13:24 ` grundig 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Hi Jörg, On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 13:51, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > > Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by > > libscg. > > Libscg is _the_ HAL for cdrecord. It is availaible the same way as today since > 10 years. I understand your point, but believe me, *nobody* wants one HAL per application. There need to be only one HAL for all, and as freedesktop's HAL has the functionnality necessary for cdrecord (minus perhaps a few fixable bugs), but libscg is SCSI-only (and for the matter, can't work with Linux IDE devices), cdrecord would better move to HAL for its CD writer discovery. Of course, the perfect outcome of this would be you turning cdrecord into a shared library which could be used by apps as they see fit, using their own means of selecting a CD writer and reporting errors and completion. Regards, Xav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 13:02 ` Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-03 9:55 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 10:57 ` Xavier Bestel 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xavier.bestel, schilling Cc: oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 13:51, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > > > Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by > > > libscg. > > > > Libscg is _the_ HAL for cdrecord. It is availaible the same way as today since > > 10 years. > > I understand your point, but believe me, *nobody* wants one HAL per > application. There need to be only one HAL for all, and as freedesktop's > HAL has the functionnality necessary for cdrecord (minus perhaps a few If people don't want this confusion, why do they start with a new system? libscg & cdrecord have been available long before Linux HAL was there. And the most important argument here is that it is extremely unlikely that this Linux HAL will handle all oddities of all CD/DVD-writers, do it is unapropriate to use this interface in case that you like to get more information than just "the drive is there". Note that UNIX people usually believe that is is best practice to have this kind of software intergrated in the kernel (or at leat in the system). This is what FreeBSD did try for some years, and FreeBSD has failed with this attempt. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 9:55 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 13:57 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:57 ` Xavier Bestel 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: xavier.bestel, linux-kernel, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > libscg & cdrecord have been available long before Linux HAL was there. Perhaps libscg was too arcane and too badly integrated into Linux? > And the most important argument here is that it is extremely unlikely that > this Linux HAL will handle all oddities of all CD/DVD-writers, do it is > unapropriate to use this interface in case that you like to get more > information than just "the drive is there". > > Note that UNIX people usually believe that is is best practice to have this > kind of software intergrated in the kernel (or at leat in the system). This is > what FreeBSD did try for some years, and FreeBSD has failed with this attempt. So why would Linux want to have it in the kernel if it hasn't worked for FreeBSD either? Thanks for proving it doesn't belong there BTW. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 13:57 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:50 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthias Andree; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, xavier.bestel, linux-kernel, acahalan >> >> Note that UNIX people usually believe that is is best practice to have this >> kind of software intergrated in the kernel (or at leat in the system). This is >> what FreeBSD did try for some years, and FreeBSD has failed with this attempt. > >So why would Linux want to have it in the kernel if it hasn't worked for >FreeBSD either? Thanks for proving it doesn't belong there BTW. > There's also something in the FreeBSD kernel that does work there, but has not worked out as good for Linux ;-) [devfs] Therefore I would not generalize it and say "if it did not work on <x>, we don't need to implement it for our <y>". Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 13:57 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 15:50 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: xavier.bestel, linux-kernel, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > > > libscg & cdrecord have been available long before Linux HAL was there. > > Perhaps libscg was too arcane and too badly integrated into Linux? >From a cdrecord point of view, this seems to rather apply to Linux HAL. > > Note that UNIX people usually believe that is is best practice to have this > > kind of software intergrated in the kernel (or at leat in the system). This is > > what FreeBSD did try for some years, and FreeBSD has failed with this attempt. > > So why would Linux want to have it in the kernel if it hasn't worked for > FreeBSD either? Thanks for proving it doesn't belong there BTW. Please try to understand my text before answering. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 9:55 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 10:57 ` Xavier Bestel 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-03 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 10:55, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr> wrote: > > I understand your point, but believe me, *nobody* wants one HAL per > > application. There need to be only one HAL for all, and as freedesktop's > > HAL has the functionnality necessary for cdrecord (minus perhaps a few > > If people don't want this confusion, why do they start with a new system? > > libscg & cdrecord have been available long before Linux HAL was there. Because libscg handles only SCSI, whereas HAL does work for all disk types, floppies, serial ports, PCI buses, graphics cards, processors, etc. Imagine there was one library per peripheral type - oh the pain. > And the most important argument here is that it is extremely unlikely that > this Linux HAL will handle all oddities of all CD/DVD-writers, do it is > unapropriate to use this interface in case that you like to get more > information than just "the drive is there". For now, it sure doesn't equal cdrecord in that area. But give it time and it will progress. After all, there's no reason HAL can't gain from your expertise on the matter. > Note that UNIX people usually believe that is is best practice to have this > kind of software intergrated in the kernel (or at leat in the system). This is > what FreeBSD did try for some years, and FreeBSD has failed with this attempt. AFAIR this was deemed too complex to live in kernelspace. Maybe FreeBSD's failure is a good indication it's true. Xav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 13:02 ` Xavier Bestel @ 2006-02-02 13:24 ` grundig 2006-02-03 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: grundig @ 2006-02-02 13:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: xavier.bestel, schilling, oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan El Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:51:19 +0100, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> escribió: > Libscg is _the_ HAL for cdrecord. It is availaible the same way as today since > 10 years. libscg being there for 10 years doesn't means that it's the right or the better way of doing things. Hal is _the_ HAL for linux, in fact HAL is targetted to become _the_ "standard" (freedesktop standard) HAL for open operative systems. HAL should be already available on solaris, at least there's a @sun.com guy who created a hald/solaris/ directory (gnome is already using HAL and sun is interested in gnome). It doesn't seem to do nothing today but I bet that sun is interested in getting HAL working in solaris (there're at least people in the opensolaris mailing lists interested). I guess the BSD guys will end up implementing BSD support some day aswell - desktop is not as important for them as it is for linux. So the fact is that HAL is quickly becoming _the_ HAL for unix systems. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 13:24 ` grundig @ 2006-02-03 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:39 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, grundig Cc: xavier.bestel, schilling, oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, jengelh, James, j, acahalan <grundig@teleline.es> wrote: > El Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:51:19 +0100, > Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> escribió: > > > Libscg is _the_ HAL for cdrecord. It is availaible the same way as today since > > 10 years. > > > libscg being there for 10 years doesn't means that it's the right or the > better way of doing things. Any new implementation first needs to prove that it is durable and (more important) that it is actively maintained. I am sure that this kind of software will never handle all oddities in drive firmware we know from CD/DVD-writers. > Hal is _the_ HAL for linux, in fact HAL is targetted to become _the_ > "standard" (freedesktop standard) HAL for open operative systems. HAL > should be already available on solaris, at least there's a @sun.com guy > who created a hald/solaris/ directory (gnome is already using HAL and > sun is interested in gnome). It doesn't seem to do nothing today but I I know this person, but Sun is creating reliable software for customers and for this reason, it is most unlikely that an incompatible change like this will be intregrated before Solaris 11 GA is available to the end of 2007. It may appear earlier in Solaris 11 beta's, but this is a different thing. > bet that sun is interested in getting HAL working in solaris (there're > at least people in the opensolaris mailing lists interested). I guess > the BSD guys will end up implementing BSD support some day aswell - desktop > is not as important for them as it is for linux. > > So the fact is that HAL is quickly becoming _the_ HAL for unix systems. I hope that Sun will not base Sun's implementations on ideas on the Linux implementaion which is known to be an "unfriendly" program as it causes problems with CD/DVD-writing. Since 1992, Sun has vold and vold is rock solid. Vold nicely coexists with cdrecord in the right way: It does not send inapropriate SCSI commnds to the drives and it does not send too many of them in a certain period of time. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 10:39 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: Linux-Kernel mailing list Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > Any new implementation first needs to prove that it is durable and (more > important) that it is actively maintained. I am sure that this kind of software > will never handle all oddities in drive firmware we know from CD/DVD-writers. The suggestion was to use it for device enumeration and then talking ioctl(...SG_IO...) to the device so obtained. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:34 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 16:20 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 8:11 ` Alexander Samad 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-02 16:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Xavier Bestel Cc: Joerg Schilling, oliver, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jerome.lacoste, James, j, acahalan >> > >> > As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and >> > it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. >> > nautilus-cd-burner). >> >> The fact that people here repeat unadquate proposals forces me to repeat my >> proposals. Name a list fo OS that implement HAL and then look at the list >> of crecord supported platforms > >Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by >libscg. > But sounds like freedesktop-hal is not available for all platforms libscg currently works on! Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 16:20 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 8:11 ` Alexander Samad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Alexander Samad @ 2006-02-03 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1124 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 05:20:13PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> > > >> > As repeated over and over here, there is such a way, it's called HAL and > >> > it is cross-platform. And it's what's used by some GUIs out there (e.g. > >> > nautilus-cd-burner). > >> > >> The fact that people here repeat unadquate proposals forces me to repeat my > >> proposals. Name a list fo OS that implement HAL and then look at the list > >> of crecord supported platforms > > > >Well ... from your sayings it seems Linux is supported by HAL but not by > >libscg. > > > But sounds like freedesktop-hal is not available for all platforms libscg > currently works on! I presume that the system api are not the same between OS either, so why can't there be different methods of interacting with the cdburners/cddrives! > > > Jan Engelhardt > -- > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2006-01-31 12:24 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-01 15:39 ` [OT] " Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-31 16:43 ` Paul Jakma 4 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Juerg Billeter @ 2006-01-31 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Thanks for your detailed response. On Die, 2006-01-31 at 11:30 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Jürg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > > It makes sense to address parallel SCSI devices via target id. If an > > operating system likes to simulate virtual SCSI buses for other bus > > types as well, ok, I have no objections. But if the operating system > > doesn't like to simulate virtual SCSI buses and allows applications to > > address devices by a filename, you should have no objections, too. > > It seems that you missunderstand this. No operating system uses file names > internally. OS instead typically handle SCSI devices that are not connected > via an arbitraring Bus like the "Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin" system > by asuming they are all on separate SCSI busses that only have one single drive > conected each. Are you sure about that? I don't doubt that many operating systems handle all devices, that are able to understand the SCSI command set, exactly as you describe it, but Linux doesn't assume such separate virtual SCSI buses for non good old Parallel SCSI drives, not even internally, as far as I understand it. Of course it doesn't use file names internally, it uses major and minor numbers, but that shouldn't matter, the major and minor numbers get exported to userspace via sysfs. > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen from outside the > Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular device into a unique SCSI > driver system although it would be apropriate. That's the point where you're not quite right, if I understand it correctly. The Linux kernel does not artificially prevent userspace applications viewing virtual SCSI buses, these virtual SCSI buses don't exist internally in the Linux kernel at all. So Linux doesn't artificially prevent anything, it just doesn't artificially _create_ virtual SCSI buses. > Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. > Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified > view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. What cdrecord does with > -scanbus is nothing really different. Well, please show me how to get the list of all possible hosts that talk TCP/IP and are directly or indirectly connected to my computer. As my computer is attached to the internet, the list would get pretty long... And even if only considering hosts in the local network, how do you get a unified view of all TCP/IP hosts conected to any of my two network adapters? > So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard > SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? > > Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, > ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy > you to go this way? Why do you believe that Linux needs to do the same as every other OS? I'd agree with you if Linux would violate a standard but AFAIK the bus view with target ids is not part of the ATAPI or a dependant standard. Please correct me if I'm wrong but the bus/target/lun combination is only a standard for some SCSI transports, at least it is for good old Parallel SCSI, yes, but SCSI over ATA doesn't define target-based addressing. > *] MS-WIN-NT even includes SCSI emulation (it allows you to connect to the > SCSI subsystem, set the Address and use SCSI commands from a limited list > to read/write sector from ATA only hard disks). Great, I have no objections but you shouldn't mandate the Linux kernel developers to implement a copy of implementations other operating systems provide. If the virtual SCSI bus and/or full SCSI emulation would be part of POSIX or an other standard Linux tries to follow, Linux should implement it, of course, but last time I checked, it's not in POSIX. > > If the Linux folks could give technical based explanations for the questions > from above and if they would create a new completely orthogonal view on SCSI [*] > I had no problem. But up to now, the only answer was: "We do it this > way because we do it this way". Linux' device nodes is such an orthogonal view that should include all devices able to speak SCSI among others. Enumeration is possible via sysfs (low-level) or much easier via the userspace HAL library from freedesktop.org. > > *] Note that this would need to implement SCSI Generic support for drives that > have no native driver in the system. If there is a device that supports the SCSI command set and the device can't be accessed with SG_IO in linux, I'd call this a Linux kernel bug. You mentioned ATAPI tapes before; if that's really the case, it's a Linux bug, yes, but it seems that nobody cares about speaking SCSI with these device types. That happens in projects with limited resources. My point is that this shouldn't matter to cdrecord. It does matter to tape drive applications that use libscg, of course. File a bug in bugzilla about that and if ATAPI tapes are important to a Linux developer, he will probably implement it. But a Linux bug affecting some device or bus types doesn't automatically mean that the whole Linux kernel device addressing is broken by design. Jürg -- Juerg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter @ 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:44 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 6:28 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-01 15:39 ` [OT] " Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, j Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Juerg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > > So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard > > SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? > > > > Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, > > ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy > > you to go this way? > > Why do you believe that Linux needs to do the same as every other OS? Why do you believe that Linux needs to be worse than other OS? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-31 13:44 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 6:28 ` Jim Crilly 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-01-31 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan Hello! > > Why do you believe that Linux needs to do the same as every other OS? > > Why do you believe that Linux needs to be worse than other OS? Sorry, but so far you have failed to produce a single plausible argument why the way chosen by Linux is worse. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected. (6/72) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:44 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 6:28 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 6:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On 01/31/06 02:37:22PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Juerg Billeter <j@bitron.ch> wrote: > > > > So why do people try to convince me that there is a need to avoid the standard > > > SCSI protocol stack because a PC might have only ATAPI? > > > > > > Major OS implementations use a unique view on SCSI (MS-win [*], FreeBSD, Solaris, > > > ...). Why do people believe that Linux needs to be different? What does it buy > > > you to go this way? > > > > Why do you believe that Linux needs to do the same as every other OS? > > Why do you believe that Linux needs to be worse than other OS? > Every other method to access those devices uses the device name, i.e. mount, fsck, etc, so why should cdrecord be different? > Jörg Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 6:28 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:37 ` grundig ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jim Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > Every other method to access those devices uses the device name, i.e. > mount, fsck, etc, so why should cdrecord be different? inadequateness on Linux did force libscg to go this way. The current method used by libscg is well established since 10 years. Now Linux likes to confuse people by trying to enforce a completely incompatible access method. Note that I need to avoid unneeded efforts and for this reason, I need to wait 5 years until is is forseable that a recent incompatible change in Linux will survive long enough to spent time on it. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 11:37 ` grundig 2006-02-02 12:15 ` Martin Mares ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: grundig @ 2006-02-02 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: schilling, jim, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan El Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:17:09 +0100, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> escribió: > Note that I need to avoid unneeded efforts and for this reason, I need to wait > 5 years until is is forseable that a recent incompatible change in Linux will > survive long enough to spent time on it. Woah. No comments. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:37 ` grundig @ 2006-02-02 12:15 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 12:24 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 16:18 ` Jim Crilly 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jim, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Hello! > Now Linux likes to confuse people by trying to enforce a completely > incompatible access method. Completely incompatible? For years, cdrecord works with it and it only prints an utterly silly warning and also has a trivial bug in the scanning code, causing it to stop too early. > Note that I need to avoid unneeded efforts and for this reason, I need to wait > 5 years until is is forseable that a recent incompatible change in Linux will > survive long enough to spent time on it. If this is reason, I will send you a patch fixing the trivial bugs and annoyances, sparing you the work. Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth "I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way." -- M. Twain ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:37 ` grundig 2006-02-02 12:15 ` Martin Mares @ 2006-02-02 12:24 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 16:18 ` Jim Crilly 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: Linux-Kernel mailing list Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-02: > Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > Every other method to access those devices uses the device name, i.e. > > mount, fsck, etc, so why should cdrecord be different? > > inadequateness on Linux did force libscg to go this way. > > The current method used by libscg is well established since 10 years. > > Now Linux likes to confuse people by trying to enforce a completely > incompatible access method. > > Note that I need to avoid unneeded efforts and for this reason, I need to wait > 5 years until is is forseable that a recent incompatible change in Linux will > survive long enough to spent time on it. It is incompatible? Looks like the code is already implemented and ATA: is in the regular device name space (where RSCSI and the other options reside as well). -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2006-02-02 12:24 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-02 16:18 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 17:17 ` Albert Cahalan 3 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan On 02/02/06 12:17:09PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > Every other method to access those devices uses the device name, i.e. > > mount, fsck, etc, so why should cdrecord be different? > > inadequateness on Linux did force libscg to go this way. > And inadequacies are what's causing libscg and 'cdrecord -scanbus' to fail to list all IDE devices on Linux. Unless the comments about it stopping the scan after getting -EPERM on one device are wrong. > The current method used by libscg is well established since 10 years. So? Change isn't always a bad thing. > Now Linux likes to confuse people by trying to enforce a completely > incompatible access method. >From my point of view it's cdrecord that's confusing Linux users by trying to force a completely different device naming method on users for no good reason. > Note that I need to avoid unneeded efforts and for this reason, I need to wait > 5 years until is is forseable that a recent incompatible change in Linux will > survive long enough to spent time on it. I could be wrong, but don't all of the other OSes that cdrecord and libscg support access the device via the device node? When I mount a device on Solaris I use /dev/c0t0d0s0 (or whatever it is)and not 0:0:0, right? So it would be safe to assume that users are used to using that form of names for their devices, so why should cdrecord be the odd man out? Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 16:18 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 17:17 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-02 20:39 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-02 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan On 2/2/06, Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > On 02/02/06 12:17:09PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > > > Every other method to access those devices uses the device name, i.e. > > > mount, fsck, etc, so why should cdrecord be different? > > > > inadequateness on Linux did force libscg to go this way. > > > > And inadequacies are what's causing libscg and 'cdrecord -scanbus' to fail > to list all IDE devices on Linux. Unless the comments about it stopping the > scan after getting -EPERM on one device are wrong. I'm seeing even worse behavior. Since /dev/hda is a disk with mounted filesystems, my kernel refuses access even for root. Thus, even root is unable to scan the /dev/hd* devices! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 17:17 ` Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-02 20:39 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-02 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan Cc: Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j > >I'm seeing even worse behavior. Since /dev/hda is a disk with mounted >filesystems, my kernel refuses access even for root. Thus, even root >is unable to scan the /dev/hd* devices! > What sort of kernel patch do you have turned on? I'd be scared if I could not even do a (read-only!) hexdump of my drive while mounted. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 20:39 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On 02/02/06 09:39:02PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > >I'm seeing even worse behavior. Since /dev/hda is a disk with mounted > >filesystems, my kernel refuses access even for root. Thus, even root > >is unable to scan the /dev/hd* devices! > > > What sort of kernel patch do you have turned on? I'd be scared if I could > not even do a (read-only!) hexdump of my drive while mounted. > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since the scanning code stops once one device fails to open the whole scan aborts. Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is being burned. If you want to read the entire thread it's bug #262678 in Debian. Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 21:46 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-03 13:25 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jim, jengelh Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 21:46 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 13:36 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jengelh, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan On 02/02/06 10:20:18PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... > > Jörg I know it's not your official version, I was merely pointing out where the 'problem' was coming from. Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:46 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 13:36 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jim Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... > I know it's not your official version, I was merely pointing out where the > 'problem' was coming from. This was only a short reply.... see also my longer reply from today. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 21:46 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-03 13:47 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-03 2:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jim, jengelh, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On 2/2/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... True enough, but it would work great if you'd fix that bug that makes cdrecord give up while scanning. I guess that's one more patch Debian will be applying. Using O_EXCL is kind of broken, because you'll need to retry any failures, but that's life. You hacked cdrecord to properly interact with the Solaris volume manager. You can do the same for HAL. Giving up while scanning is a problem for other reasons. Let me introduce you to SE Linux. One can have RAWIO capability, RT capability, mlock() capability, and still not have the right to access all devices. You might not even be able to get stat() to succeed, but you could burn a CD if you use the correct device file. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-03 13:47 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan Cc: Joerg Schilling, jim, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j >Giving up while scanning is a problem for other reasons. >Let me introduce you to SE Linux. One can have RAWIO >capability, RT capability, mlock() capability, and still not >have the right to access all devices. You might not even >be able to get stat() to succeed, but you could burn a CD >if you use the correct device file. > Unfortunately, setting up SELinux is currently not easy. Jan Engelhardt -- | Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-03 13:47 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, acahalan Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, jengelh, James, j Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/2/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > > > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > > > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... > > True enough, but it would work great if you'd fix that bug > that makes cdrecord give up while scanning. I guess > that's one more patch Debian will be applying. As including O_EXCL would disallow to use more than one cdrecord program at the same time, there is no chance for the mains stream source. > Using O_EXCL is kind of broken, because you'll need to > retry any failures, but that's life. You hacked cdrecord to > properly interact with the Solaris volume manager. You > can do the same for HAL. Well the big difference with Solaris is that several modifications have been applied by Sun to the vold sub-system on Solaris in order to decently support cdrecord. The last change was done with Nevada Build 21 in August 2005. It makes sense for Linux not to ignore CD/DVD writing. Solaris also did chose not to ignore cdrecord. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 16:54 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 more replies) 2006-02-03 16:10 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 18:20 ` [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] " Matthias Andree 2 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: acahalan, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j On 02/03/06 04:20:47PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2/2/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > > > > > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > > > > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > > > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > > > > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... > > > > True enough, but it would work great if you'd fix that bug > > that makes cdrecord give up while scanning. I guess > > that's one more patch Debian will be applying. > > As including O_EXCL would disallow to use more than one cdrecord > program at the same time, there is no chance for the mains stream source. Maybe I'm just being thick, but wouldn't that only prevent you from using cdrecord on the same device multiple times? The only thing I can see being opened with O_EXCL is the target device. > > Using O_EXCL is kind of broken, because you'll need to > > retry any failures, but that's life. You hacked cdrecord to > > properly interact with the Solaris volume manager. You > > can do the same for HAL. > > Well the big difference with Solaris is that several modifications have been > applied by Sun to the vold sub-system on Solaris in order to decently > support cdrecord. > > The last change was done with Nevada Build 21 in August 2005. > > It makes sense for Linux not to ignore CD/DVD writing. Solaris also did > chose not to ignore cdrecord. > > Jörg A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 16:54 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jim Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. Please let us either asume that it is in or not.... If you tell me it is not in, then cdrecord definitely needs everything it currently does just because Linux is missing any needed feature. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 16:54 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-03 18:35 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 18:57 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-03 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: acahalan, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> writes: > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. Does that mean that hald doesn't actually play nice with cdrecord? -- Krzysztof Halasa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-03 18:35 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 18:57 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 18:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Halasa Cc: Joerg Schilling, acahalan, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j On 02/03/06 06:49:21PM +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> writes: > > > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. > > Does that mean that hald doesn't actually play nice with cdrecord? > -- > Krzysztof Halasa > - That's what the bug reports in Debian and Ubuntu say, the periodic polling that hald does on the CD devices causes interruptions in the burning process. Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-03 18:35 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 18:57 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 18:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, khc Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> writes: > > > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. > > Does that mean that hald doesn't actually play nice with cdrecord? I cannot speak from own experiences on Linux here, but this is what I see: - If you check Linux distributions for related bug reports, you find many problems with hald. - If you try to find similar bug reports for Solaris vold, there is no report I am aware of. Trying to rate this would make me asume that hald could be changed to play better with cdrecord. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 16:54 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers ` (2 more replies) 2 siblings, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-03 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:53:50AM -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. Actually, since at that point in time HAL is the only way to do device discovery with the linux kernel, problems in HAL are problems in linux. There is *no* other way than HAL to do the mapping between a point in the sysfs tree and a device node in /dev[1]. OG. [1] Unless you consider stating every node in /dev acceptable just to find the correct major/minor. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 18:45 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:37 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:50 ` Phillip Susi 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 07:04:21PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:53:50AM -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. > > Actually, since at that point in time HAL is the only way to do device > discovery with the linux kernel, problems in HAL are problems in > linux. There is *no* other way than HAL to do the mapping between a > point in the sysfs tree and a device node in /dev[1]. That's all nonsense! $ udevinfo -r -q name -p /block/sr0 /dev/sr0 $ udevinfo -q path -n /dev/sr0 /block/sr0 $ udevinfo -q all -p /block/sr0 P: /block/sr0 N: sr0 S: disk/by-path/pci-0000:00:1f.2-scsi-1:0:0:0 S: cdrecorder S: cdrom E: ID_VENDOR=MATSHITA E: ID_MODEL=DVD-RAM_UJ-822S E: ID_REVISION=1.61 E: ID_SERIAL= E: ID_TYPE=cd E: ID_BUS=scsi E: ID_PATH=pci-0000:00:1f.2-scsi-1:0:0:0 Kay ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 18:45 ` Olivier Galibert 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-03 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kay Sievers; +Cc: linux-kernel On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 07:13:14PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > That's all nonsense! > > $ udevinfo -r -q name -p /block/sr0 > /dev/sr0 Ok, I couldn't find it for love or money. But it's exactly what's needed. I see all the useful information is in /dev/.udev.tdb. I need to have a look at that TDB format, but exporting the database to other programs works. OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 18:37 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-04 15:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-03 19:50 ` Phillip Susi 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On 02/03/06 07:04:21PM +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:53:50AM -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > A bug in HAL is not a bug in Linux. If the HAL people need to make some > > changes to their daemon to make it play nice with cdrecord and the like > > that's fine, but telling people here makes no sense. > > Actually, since at that point in time HAL is the only way to do device > discovery with the linux kernel, problems in HAL are problems in > linux. There is *no* other way than HAL to do the mapping between a > point in the sysfs tree and a device node in /dev[1]. > > OG. > > [1] Unless you consider stating every node in /dev acceptable just to > find the correct major/minor. It's not about device discovery, hald is polling removable devices every 2s to see if new media was inserted and when it polls a CD drive that's currently burning a disc it causes problems. It's documented in Debian bug #262678. Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:37 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-04 15:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-04 15:43 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-04 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert; +Cc: linux-kernel "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> writes: > It's not about device discovery, hald is polling removable devices every 2s > to see if new media was inserted and when it polls a CD drive that's > currently burning a disc it causes problems. It's documented in Debian bug > #262678. Ok. So what's wrong with cdrecord using O_EXCL (and maybe retrying for few seconds) so no other program (hald or, say, a user mistaking a device) can interrupt it? And, if we are here, what's wrong with hald using O_EXCL to not interrupt any other program (does hald need to check the media if it's in use)? I assume the problem wouldn't exist with hald using O_EXCL and cdrecord not (yet) using it, would it? -- Krzysztof Halasa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-04 15:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-04 15:43 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-04 18:33 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-04 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Halasa; +Cc: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Sat, 04 Feb 2006, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > And, if we are here, what's wrong with hald using O_EXCL to not > interrupt any other program (does hald need to check the media > if it's in use)? I assume the problem wouldn't exist with hald > using O_EXCL and cdrecord not (yet) using it, would it? Let me throw in a stupid question: Is O_EXCL cooperative, in that other access is only blocked if both tasks use open(...O_EXCL...)? -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-04 15:43 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-04 18:33 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-04 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthias Andree; +Cc: Krzysztof Halasa, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel > >> And, if we are here, what's wrong with hald using O_EXCL to not >> interrupt any other program (does hald need to check the media >> if it's in use)? I assume the problem wouldn't exist with hald >> using O_EXCL and cdrecord not (yet) using it, would it? > >Let me throw in a stupid question: Is O_EXCL cooperative, in that other >access is only blocked if both tasks use open(...O_EXCL...)? > That would be some sort of "shared" what you describe. O_EXCL basically means that there may only be one file descriptor open on it across the whole kernel. "if both tasks" already includes multiple file descriptors. (Note that dup() does not really make a new filedescriptor.) Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-04 15:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-04 15:43 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 16:04 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-05 16:15 ` Phillip Susi 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-05 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Halasa; +Cc: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel >> It's not about device discovery, hald is polling removable devices every 2s >> to see if new media was inserted and when it polls a CD drive that's >> currently burning a disc it causes problems. It's documented in Debian bug >> #262678. > >Ok. So what's wrong with cdrecord using O_EXCL (and maybe retrying >for few seconds) so no other program (hald or, say, a user mistaking >a device) can interrupt it? > I would say we all forgot to RTFM. Because O_EXCL does nothing *unless* O_CREAT is specified, which probably *is not* specified in cdrecord or hal. There is no reason to have hal or cdrecord create a device node - which you can't do with open() anyway. Jan Engelhardt -- | Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator | Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/ | jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-05 16:04 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-05 16:15 ` Phillip Susi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-05 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> writes: > I would say we all forgot to RTFM. Because O_EXCL does nothing *unless* > O_CREAT is specified, which probably *is not* specified in cdrecord or > hal. That would be the case if the CD writter wasn't a block device. For a block device fs/block_dev.c: static int blkdev_open(struct inode * inode, struct file * filp) { ... if (!(filp->f_flags & O_EXCL) ) return 0; if (!(res = bd_claim(bdev, filp))) return 0; blkdev_put(bdev); return res; -- Krzysztof Halasa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 16:04 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-05 16:15 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-05 17:50 ` Kyle Moffett 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-05 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: Krzysztof Halasa, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Jan Engelhardt wrote: > I would say we all forgot to RTFM. Because O_EXCL does nothing *unless* > O_CREAT is specified, which probably *is not* specified in cdrecord or > hal. There is no reason to have hal or cdrecord create a device node - > which you can't do with open() anyway. > I think you are misinterpreting the man page, because it isn't worded very clearly. It should not even mention O_CREAT because it has nothing to do with O_EXCL; it is just repeating the semantics of O_CREAT ( if the file already exists, the call fails ) which would of course, apply if you do use O_CREAT in conjunction with any other flag including O_EXCL. It does not say that you must use O_EXCL with O_CREAT. The rest of the description talks about using lockfiles as an alternative to ensure exclusive access to the file on NFS where O_EXCL is broken. The intent of O_EXCL is clearly to provide the caller with exclusive access to the file. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 16:15 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-05 17:50 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-02-05 21:15 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 22:27 ` Neil Brown 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-02-05 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Susi Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Krzysztof Halasa, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Feb 05, 2006, at 11:15, Phillip Susi wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> I would say we all forgot to RTFM. Because O_EXCL does nothing >> *unless* O_CREAT is specified, which probably *is not* specified >> in cdrecord or hal. There is no reason to have hal or cdrecord >> create a device node - which you can't do with open() anyway. > > I think you are misinterpreting the man page, because it isn't > worded very clearly. It should not even mention O_CREAT because it > has nothing to do with O_EXCL; it is just repeating the semantics > of O_CREAT ( if the file already exists, the call fails ) which > would of course, apply if you do use O_CREAT in conjunction with > any other flag including O_EXCL. It does not say that you must use > O_EXCL with O_CREAT. The rest of the description talks about using > lockfiles as an alternative to ensure exclusive access to the file > on NFS where O_EXCL is broken. The intent of O_EXCL is clearly to > provide the caller with exclusive access to the file. You don't have this right either. The way open() works: If you specify O_CREAT (and not O_EXCL), it will create the file if it does not exist, and open the existing file otherwise. If you specify O_EXCL (and not O_CREAT), it is implementation defined what will happen (in the Linux case, this opens a block device for exclusive access). If you specify O_CREAT|O_EXCL, it will atomically create the file if it does not exist, otherwise it will return the error -EEXIST. Cheers, Kyle Moffett -- Q: Why do programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas? A: Because OCT 31 == DEC 25. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 17:50 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-02-05 21:15 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 22:27 ` Neil Brown 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-05 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kyle Moffett Cc: Phillip Susi, Krzysztof Halasa, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel > > If you specify O_EXCL (and not O_CREAT), it is implementation defined what will > happen (in the Linux case, this opens a block device for exclusive access). > And with plain files, I supose it's free-for-all, right? 'Cause that's what my testcase yielded. :/ Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 17:50 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-02-05 21:15 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-05 22:27 ` Neil Brown 2006-02-06 11:15 ` Krzysztof Halasa 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Neil Brown @ 2006-02-05 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kyle Moffett Cc: Phillip Susi, Jan Engelhardt, Krzysztof Halasa, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel On Sunday February 5, mrmacman_g4@mac.com wrote: > > If you specify O_EXCL (and not O_CREAT), it is implementation defined > what will happen (in the Linux case, this opens a block device for > exclusive access). With Linux, O_EXCL on a block devices isn't *exactly* exclusive access. It only provided you exclusive access against other people who ask for exclusive access, which includes in-kernel usage like mount, md, dm, and swap. So if you open a block device O_EXCL, it will fail if the block device is already open O_EXCL or is mounted, or in use by the kernel in some other way (including if a partition is open O_EXCL). An if you succeed in getting an O_EXCL open, then no-one else will be able to get an O_EXCL open, or mount the filesystem etc. Bit on open without O_EXCL will always succeed no matter whether someone has it O_EXCL or not. So it is a lot like an advisory exclusive lock on the whole block device. NeilBrown ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-05 22:27 ` Neil Brown @ 2006-02-06 11:15 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-06 14:58 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-06 11:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Neil Brown Cc: Kyle Moffett, Phillip Susi, Jan Engelhardt, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> writes: > Bit on open without O_EXCL will always succeed no matter whether > someone has it O_EXCL or not. Ok. That means hald has no use for it, but cdrecord and similar programs could use it. -- Krzysztof Halasa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-06 11:15 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-06 14:58 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-06 18:17 ` Krzysztof Halasa 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-06 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Halasa Cc: Neil Brown, Kyle Moffett, Phillip Susi, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel > >> Bit on open without O_EXCL will always succeed no matter whether >> someone has it O_EXCL or not. > >Ok. That means hald has no use for it, but cdrecord and similar >programs could use it. But that again sounds like hald won't use O_EXCL, therefore could always be able to open the device and potentially send commands which interrupt cd writing. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-06 14:58 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-06 18:17 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-06 18:37 ` Phillip Susi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-06 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Neil Brown, Kyle Moffett, Phillip Susi, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> writes: > But that again sounds like hald won't use O_EXCL, therefore could always be > able to open the device and potentially send commands which interrupt cd > writing. Yep. Both need that. And I need some coffee to recover from non-logical thinking. -- Krzysztof Halasa ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-06 18:17 ` Krzysztof Halasa @ 2006-02-06 18:37 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-09 16:09 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-06 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Halasa Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Neil Brown, Kyle Moffett, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Out of curiosity, what commands does hal send the drive that can interrupt burning? I've been reading the MMC-5 standard lately and it looks like while the drive is burning, attempts to send it other commands that would interfere with the burn are supposed to be failed with an error code indicating that a burn is in progress, and thus, avoid making a coaster. Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> writes: > > >> But that again sounds like hald won't use O_EXCL, therefore could always be >> able to open the device and potentially send commands which interrupt cd >> writing. >> > > Yep. Both need that. And I need some coffee to recover from > non-logical thinking. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-06 18:37 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-09 16:09 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-09 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Susi Cc: Krzysztof Halasa, Neil Brown, Kyle Moffett, Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel > > Out of curiosity, what commands does hal send the drive that can interrupt > burning? I've been reading the MMC-5 standard lately and it looks like while > the drive is burning, attempts to send it other commands that would interfere > with the burn are supposed to be failed with an error code indicating that a > burn is in progress, and thus, avoid making a coaster. > At least there needs to be a command that is not ignored to stop a burn. Though, hald would not be /that/ evil. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 18:37 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 19:50 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 20:47 ` Olivier Galibert 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, linux-kernel Olivier Galibert wrote: > Actually, since at that point in time HAL is the only way to do device > discovery with the linux kernel, problems in HAL are problems in > linux. There is *no* other way than HAL to do the mapping between a > point in the sysfs tree and a device node in /dev[1]. That information is available in /sys, which is how HAL discovers it. If you wanted to, you could bypass HAL and go directly to /sys to perform your own discovery. Also HAL is not a part of the linux kernel, therefore a problem in HAL is NOT a problem in linux, even if there were no other way to get the information as you ( wrongly ) asserted. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:50 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 20:47 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 21:06 ` Phillip Susi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-03 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Susi; +Cc: linux-kernel On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 02:50:11PM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > Olivier Galibert wrote: > >Actually, since at that point in time HAL is the only way to do device > >discovery with the linux kernel, problems in HAL are problems in > >linux. There is *no* other way than HAL to do the mapping between a > >point in the sysfs tree and a device node in /dev[1]. > > That information is available in /sys, which is how HAL discovers it. No, it isn't. OTOH, udev maintains it, so I guess that's good enough. It makes udev the kernel interface though. I hope they now care about compatibility (/dev/.udev.pdb vs. /dev/.udev/db/* anyone?). > If you wanted to, you could bypass HAL and go directly to /sys to > perform your own discovery. Also HAL is not a part of the linux kernel, > therefore a problem in HAL is NOT a problem in linux, even if there were > no other way to get the information as you ( wrongly ) asserted. Bullshit. If <x> is the only interface available to a kernel service, then <x> is part of the kernel whether you like it or not. Case in point, the ALSA library. OG. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 20:47 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-03 21:06 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-04 0:02 ` Olivier Galibert 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 21:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, Phillip Susi, linux-kernel Olivier Galibert wrote: > No, it isn't. OTOH, udev maintains it, so I guess that's good enough. > It makes udev the kernel interface though. I hope they now care about > compatibility (/dev/.udev.pdb vs. /dev/.udev/db/* anyone?). > Yes, it is, where do you think udev gets it's information from? That's right, from /sys. Sysfs is the kernel interface, not udev; the 'u' in udev is for 'user', as in NOT part of the kernel. > > Bullshit. If <x> is the only interface available to a kernel service, > then <x> is part of the kernel whether you like it or not. Case in > point, the ALSA library. Bullshit yourself. If cdrecord is the only application for burning cds, that does not make it the kernel interface for cds, and certainly does not make it part of the kernel. The kernel interface is the point of interaction between user and kernel code, which is sysfs. Udev and HAL are two user mode ( NOT parts of the kernel ) components built to put the information from sysfs to use in user space, and other applications are encouraged to utilize the services those daemons provide. By no stretch of the imagination does that make them part of the kernel. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 21:06 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-04 0:02 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-04 16:56 ` Phillip Susi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-04 0:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Susi; +Cc: linux-kernel On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 04:06:13PM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > Olivier Galibert wrote: > >No, it isn't. OTOH, udev maintains it, so I guess that's good enough. > >It makes udev the kernel interface though. I hope they now care about > >compatibility (/dev/.udev.pdb vs. /dev/.udev/db/* anyone?). > > > > Yes, it is, where do you think udev gets it's information from? The device node name? From the rules in /etc/udev/rules.d/*. Udev is the one which creates it in the first place, deriving it in a user-defined way from the sysfs information. It does _not_ give back that information to the kernel. Maybe it should. > >Bullshit. If <x> is the only interface available to a kernel service, > >then <x> is part of the kernel whether you like it or not. Case in > >point, the ALSA library. > > Bullshit yourself. If cdrecord is the only application for burning cds, > that does not make it the kernel interface for cds, and certainly does > not make it part of the kernel. The kernel interface is the point of > interaction between user and kernel code, which is sysfs. The kernel does not provide a cd burning service, only a scsi packet transport service called SG_IO. The kernel *does* provide a device enumeration service, only it does it at this point through udev for reasons that are 50% technical and 50% political. If you want to be able to use a 2.6 kernel with hotplug devices udev[1] is mandatory. As such, from an engineering point of view, udev is part of the kernel even if it isn't in the source tarball on kernel.org. And for now it is the lowest level interface to device enumeration. OG. [1] Or hotplug, maybe. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-04 0:02 ` Olivier Galibert @ 2006-02-04 16:56 ` Phillip Susi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-04 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olivier Galibert, Phillip Susi, linux-kernel Olivier Galibert wrote: > The device node name? From the rules in /etc/udev/rules.d/*. Udev is > the one which creates it in the first place, deriving it in a > user-defined way from the sysfs information. It does _not_ give back > that information to the kernel. Maybe it should. > > Ohh, I see what you are saying now. Yes, it is up to udev to create the device nodes, and the kernel does not know or care about the nodes. If an application wants to find existing nodes it can open it needs to query udev or hal. If it wants to find out what devices the kernel exports, it can look in /sys and make its own devnode to access them. > The kernel does not provide a cd burning service, only a scsi packet > transport service called SG_IO. > > The kernel *does* provide a device enumeration service, only it does > it at this point through udev for reasons that are 50% technical and > What part of the user/kernel separation don't you understand? udev is user mode code which interfaces with the kernel via sysfs. Other user mode code is free to do that as well, or just use udev. Either way, the only kernel interface involved is sysfs. The kernel does not know or care about udev or what it does, only sysfs. The kernel provides enumeration through sysfs, and that is all. > 50% political. If you want to be able to use a 2.6 kernel with > hotplug devices udev[1] is mandatory. As such, from an engineering > point of view, udev is part of the kernel even if it isn't in the > source tarball on kernel.org. And for now it is the lowest level > interface to device enumeration. > > Your logic is flawed. X + Y = Z does NOT mean that X ( linux ) and Y ( udev ) are one and the same even if Z ( a usable GNU/Linux system with hotplug support ) is desirable. The kernel provides sysfs as it's interface, and udev and hal provide higher level interfaces. In much the same way, the kernel frame buffer driver provides one interface, and Xorg provides higher level interface built on top of the kernel interface. By no stretch of the imagination is Xorg the kernel interface to the video card, which is what you are arguing. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 16:10 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 16:56 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:20 ` [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] " Matthias Andree 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: acahalan, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, jengelh, James, j Joerg Schilling wrote: > As including O_EXCL would disallow to use more than one cdrecord > program at the same time, there is no chance for the mains stream source. > > You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 16:10 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 16:56 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 20:01 ` Phillip Susi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, psusi Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com> wrote: > You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the > same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you > from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 16:56 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:22 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 20:01 ` Phillip Susi 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: psusi, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, James, j, acahalan > >> You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the >> same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you >> from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. > >It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. >two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. > Apart from transfer speed issues and potential buffer underruns coming along with that, is there anything technically impossible with writing to two ATAPI drives at the same time? Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 19:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-04 11:08 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:22 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jengelh Cc: psusi, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, James, j, acahalan Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > >> You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the > >> same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you > >> from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. > > > >It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. > >two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. > > > Apart from transfer speed issues and potential buffer underruns coming > along with that, is there anything technically impossible with writing to > two ATAPI drives at the same time? It depends on what type of drive you use. If you chose a drive that blocks the ATA cable while processing a START/STOP/UNIT, you are out of luck. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:15 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-04 11:08 ` Jan Engelhardt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-04 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: psusi, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, James, j, acahalan >> >It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. >> >two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. >> > >> Apart from transfer speed issues and potential buffer underruns coming >> along with that, is there anything technically impossible with writing to >> two ATAPI drives at the same time? > >It depends on what type of drive you use. > >If you chose a drive that blocks the ATA cable while processing a >START/STOP/UNIT, you are out of luck. > That may be what I experienced with that aopen writer. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:15 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 19:22 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt; +Cc: linux-kernel Jan Engelhardt schrieb am 2006-02-03: > > > >> You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the > >> same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you > >> from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. > > > >It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. > >two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. > > > Apart from transfer speed issues and potential buffer underruns coming > along with that, is there anything technically impossible with writing to > two ATAPI drives at the same time? Bus locking while waiting for command completion. If you start a long-lasting operation on one device, the other device on the same cable is blocked so you cannot feed the other. Same holds for SCSI if one of the devices involved doesn't disconnect from the bus for that long-lasting command. Try for instance "eject /dev/hdc" while writing to /dev/hdd, or same stuff with sr0 and sr1. Been there, done that, got a coaster. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 16:56 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 20:01 ` Phillip Susi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Joerg Schilling wrote: >> You CAN'T have multiple cdrecord processes burning the same disc at the >> same time; the very idea makes no sense. The O_EXCL just prevents you >> from trying such foolishness and creating a coaster. >> > > It does not prevent you from creatig a coaster in case you connect e.g. > two ATAPI writers to the same ATA cable. So what? What does that have to do with my rebutting your statement that O_EXCL prevents multiple cdrecords? O_EXCL also does not prevent you from kicking the plug out of the wall while burning, but it DOES prevent another process from trying to mess with the drive while cdrecord is and clobbering things up, which is a good thing. It does not prevent you from using cdrecord at the same time on different drives. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 16:10 ` Phillip Susi @ 2006-02-03 18:20 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 18:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 18:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: acahalan, linux-kernel, cdwrite Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2/2/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > > > > > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > > > > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > > > > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > > > > > > This is not cdrecord but a bastardized version...... > > > > True enough, but it would work great if you'd fix that bug > > that makes cdrecord give up while scanning. I guess > > that's one more patch Debian will be applying. > > As including O_EXCL would disallow to use more than one cdrecord > program at the same time, there is no chance for the mains stream source. Nobody suggested O_EXCL as a fix for the scanning bug. It seems your capabilities to follow a complex discussion are generally overtaxed a bit... sorry for overestimating you. So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. If deemed safe, please apply and test. It appears to work for me (as in: blanks and writes CD-RW when setuid root) on SUSE Linux 10.0 (kernel 2.6.13-15.7 i686 bigmem 4kstacks blah sülz) and it compiles properly on FreeBSD 6-STABLE i686. (Sorry for the off-topic bloat, but as we've had so many messages, a few KB patching won't add much to the pain any more.) And no, I am not going to read Solaris sources. Linux does not have to care how Solaris works, but your Linux interface code has to work properly on Linux and not put up artificial obstacles. > Well the big difference with Solaris is that several modifications have been > applied by Sun to the vold sub-system on Solaris in order to decently > support cdrecord. For the 100th time, you need to substantiate your bug claims or feature requests with good reasons. "Somebody else is doing it." is not sufficient. > The last change was done with Nevada Build 21 in August 2005. Is this part of the Solaris 10 update shipped earlier this year? Now for the patch diff, diffstat and comments first: # cdrecord/cdrecord.c | 114 2 + 105 - 7 ! # mkisofs/write.c | 4 0 + 0 - 4 ! # libscg/scsi-linux-sg.c | 82 3 + 54 - 25 ! # 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 159 deletions(-), 36 modifications(!) - The cdrecord patch removes bogus Linux warnings and adds the GPL 2a/2c guacamole. - The write.c patch fixes trigraph, a patch Jörg keeps losing. - The libscg patch removes bogus warnings, kills the ATA transport -- this is an alpha version, not stable code (it can be autodetected by looking at the device name, I'm not sure if the LF_ATA is really useful nowaday), fixes the scanning bugs and unifies Linux SG_IO device namespaces. Further observations: - Jörg wants the kernel to add junk for device enumeration when removing artificial barriers from libscg does the same job? Now that's impressive after all his bold claims. I think Jens and a few other people deserve apologies. - the code should glob /dev/sg* and probe everything and filter out dupes by looking at major/minor. - linuxcheck() was broken and assuming fixed-format, the changed-interface warning disappeared with linux 2.6.10 ('1' < '8'), and is obsolete anyhow since 2.01.01a05. Nevermind the whining :-P - Jörg makes a big fuss about duplicated code in Linux kernel, but this appears more of a "not in my back-yard" kind complaint... duplicated code in cdrecord anyone? Two screenful removed by the patch, help yourself. How does this look (setuid root, the kernel appears to refuse the obsolete "REZERO UNIT" which breaks f.i. cdrecord -toc)? $ bins/i686-linux-cc/cdrecord -scanbus Cdrecord-Clone 2.01.01a04 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Copyright (C) 1995-2006 Joerg Schilling, 2006 Matthias Andree NOTE: this version of cdrecord is an inofficial (modified) release of cdrecord that removed some bogus whining of the original author. Although unlikely, it may have bugs that are not present in the original version. Please send bug reports and support requests to <matthias.andree@gmx.de>. The original author should not be bothered with problems of this version. Linux sg driver version: 3.5.27 Using libscg version 'schily-0.8'. bins/i686-linux-cc/cdrecord: Warning: using inofficial libscg transport code version (-scsi-linux-sg.c-1.86+ma '@(#)scsi-linux-sg.c 1.86 05/11/22 Copyright 1997 J. Schilling'). scsibus0: 0,0,0 0) 'ATA ' 'SAMSUNG SP2004C ' 'VM10' Disk 0,1,0 1) * ... scsibus1: 1,0,0 100) '_NEC ' 'DVD_RW ND-4550A ' '1.07' Removable CD-ROM 1,1,0 101) 'PLEXTOR ' 'CD-R PX-W4824A' '1.06' Removable CD-ROM 1,2,0 102) * ... scsibus2: 2,0,0 200) * 2,1,0 201) * 2,2,0 202) 'PLEXTOR ' 'CD-ROM PX-32TS ' '1.02' Removable CD-ROM 2,3,0 203) * ... 0,0,0 is /dev/sda /dev/sg0, driven by sd and sg (libata) 1,*,0 are /dev/hdc /dev/hdd, driven by ide-cd (via82cxxx) 2,2,0 is /dev/sr0 /dev/sg1, driven by sr and sg (sym53c8xx_2) Sorry 'bout posting this as bloated context patch, this is for Jörg-Schilling-compliance and perhaps Solaris 2.6 too. *** ./cdrecord/cdrecord.c.orig Sun Jan 29 19:52:03 2006 --- ./cdrecord/cdrecord.c Fri Feb 3 17:17:08 2006 *************** *** 245,251 **** LOCAL void print_wrmodes __PR((cdr_t *dp)); LOCAL BOOL check_wrmode __PR((cdr_t *dp, int wmode, int tflags)); LOCAL void set_wrmode __PR((cdr_t *dp, int wmode, int tflags)); - LOCAL void linuxcheck __PR((void)); struct exargs { SCSI *scgp; --- 245,250 ---- *************** *** 352,368 **** # define CLONE_TITLE "" #endif if ((flags & F_MSINFO) == 0 || lverbose || flags & F_VERSION) { ! printf("Cdrecord%s%s %s (%s-%s-%s) Copyright (C) 1995-2006 Jörg Schilling\n", PRODVD_TITLE, CLONE_TITLE, cdr_version, HOST_CPU, HOST_VENDOR, HOST_OS); #if defined(SOURCE_MODIFIED) || !defined(IS_SCHILY_XCONFIG) ! #define INSERT_YOUR_EMAIL_ADDRESS_HERE #define NO_SUPPORT 0 printf("NOTE: this version of cdrecord is an inofficial (modified) release of cdrecord\n"); ! printf(" and thus may have bugs that are not present in the original version.\n"); #if NO_SUPPORT printf(" The author of the modifications decided not to provide a support e-mail\n"); printf(" address so there is absolutely no support for this version.\n"); --- 351,370 ---- # define CLONE_TITLE "" #endif if ((flags & F_MSINFO) == 0 || lverbose || flags & F_VERSION) { ! printf("Cdrecord%s%s %s (%s-%s-%s) Copyright (C) 1995-2006 Joerg Schilling, 2006 Matthias Andree\n", PRODVD_TITLE, CLONE_TITLE, cdr_version, HOST_CPU, HOST_VENDOR, HOST_OS); + #define SOURCE_MODIFIED 1 + #if defined(SOURCE_MODIFIED) || !defined(IS_SCHILY_XCONFIG) ! #define INSERT_YOUR_EMAIL_ADDRESS_HERE "matthias.andree@gmx.de" #define NO_SUPPORT 0 printf("NOTE: this version of cdrecord is an inofficial (modified) release of cdrecord\n"); ! printf(" that removed some bogus whining of the original author. Although unlikely,\n"); ! printf(" it may have bugs that are not present in the original version.\n"); #if NO_SUPPORT printf(" The author of the modifications decided not to provide a support e-mail\n"); printf(" address so there is absolutely no support for this version.\n"); *************** *** 380,410 **** #endif } - /* - * I am sorry that even for version 1.308 of cdrecord.c, I am forced to do - * things like this, but defective versions of cdrecord cause a lot of - * work load to me and it seems to be impossible to otherwise convince - * SuSE to cooperate. - * As people contact me and bother me with the related problems, - * it is obvious that SuSE is violating subsection 6 in the preamble of - * the GPL. - * - * The reason for including a test against SuSE's private - * distribution environment is only that SuSE violates the GPL for - * a long time and seems not to be willing to follow the requirements - * imposed by the GPL. If SuSE starts to ship non defective versions - * of cdrecord or informs their customers that they would need to - * compile cdrecord themselves in order to get a working cdrecord, - * they should contact me for a permission to change the related test. - * - * Note that although the SuSE test is effective only for SuSE, the - * intention to have non bastardized versions out is not limited - * to SuSE. It is bad to see that in special in the "Linux" business, - * companies prefer a model with many proprietary differing programs - * instead of cooperating with the program authors. - */ - linuxcheck(); /* For version 1.308 of cdrecord.c */ - if (flags & F_VERSION) exit(0); /* --- 382,387 ---- *************** *** 4699,4780 **** } dsp->ds_wrmode = WM_NONE; } - - /* - * I am sorry that even for version 1.308 of cdrecord.c, I am forced to do - * things like this, but defective versions of cdrecord cause a lot of - * work load to me and it seems to be impossible to otherwise convince - * SuSE to cooperate. - * As people contact me and bother me with the related problems, - * it is obvious that SuSE is violating subsection 6 in the preamble of - * the GPL. - * - * The reason for including a test against SuSE's private - * distribution environment is only that SuSE violates the GPL for - * a long time and seems not to be willing to follow the requirements - * imposed by the GPL. If SuSE starts to ship non defective versions - * of cdrecord or informs their customers that they would need to - * compile cdrecord themselves in order to get a working cdrecord, - * they should contact me for a permission to change the related test. - * - * Note that although the SuSE test is effective only for SuSE, the - * intention to have non bastardized versions out is not limited - * to SuSE. It is bad to see that in special in the "Linux" business, - * companies prefer a model with many proprietary differing programs - * instead of cooperating with the program authors. - */ - #if defined(linux) || defined(__linux) || defined(__linux__) - #ifdef HAVE_UNAME - #include <sys/utsname.h> - #endif - #endif - - LOCAL void - linuxcheck() /* For version 1.308 of cdrecord.c */ - { - #if defined(linux) || defined(__linux) || defined(__linux__) - #ifdef HAVE_UNAME - struct utsname un; - - if (uname(&un) >= 0) { - /* - * I really hope that the Linux kernel developers will soon - * fix the most annoying bugs (as promised). Linux-2.6.8 - * has still much more reported problems than Linux-2.4. - */ - if ((un.release[0] == '2' && un.release[1] == '.') && - (un.release[2] == '5' || un.release[2] == '6')) { - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "Warning: Running on Linux-%s\n", un.release); - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "There are unsettled issues with Linux-2.5 and newer.\n"); - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "If you have unexpected problems, please try Linux-2.4 or Solaris.\n"); - } - if ((un.release[0] == '2' && un.release[1] == '.') && - (un.release[2] > '6' || - (un.release[2] == '6' && un.release[3] == '.' && un.release[4] >= '8'))) { - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "Warning: Linux-2.6.8 introduced incompatible interface changes.\n"); - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "Warning: SCSI transport does no longer work for suid root programs.\n"); - errmsgno(EX_BAD, - "Warning: if cdrecord fails, try to run it from a root account.\n"); - } - } - #endif - #if 0 - if (streql(HOST_VENDOR, "suse")) { /* For version 1.308 of cdrecord.c */ - /* 1.308 */ errmsgno(EX_BAD, - /* 1.308 */ "SuSE Linux is known to ship bastardized and defective versions of cdrecord.\n"); - /* 1.308 */ errmsgno(EX_BAD, - /* 1.308 */ "SuSE is unwilling to cooperate with the authors.\n"); - /* 1.308 */ errmsgno(EX_BAD, - /* 1.308 */ "If you like to have a working version of cdrtools, get the\n"); - /* 1.308 */ errmsgno(EX_BAD, - /* 1.308 */ "original source from ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/\n"); - - } - #endif - #endif - } --- 4676,4678 ---- *** ./mkisofs/write.c.orig Fri Feb 3 15:49:23 2006 --- ./mkisofs/write.c Fri Feb 3 15:49:25 2006 *************** *** 834,843 **** if (dcount < 2) { #ifdef USE_LIBSCHILY errmsgno(EX_BAD, ! "Directory size too small (. or .. missing ???)\n"); #else fprintf(stderr, ! "Directory size too small (. or .. missing ???)\n"); #endif sort_goof = 1; --- 834,843 ---- if (dcount < 2) { #ifdef USE_LIBSCHILY errmsgno(EX_BAD, ! "Directory size too small (. or .. missing ??\077)\n"); #else fprintf(stderr, ! "Directory size too small (. or .. missing ??\077)\n"); #endif sort_goof = 1; *** ./libscg/scsi-linux-sg.c.orig Fri Feb 3 15:44:39 2006 --- ./libscg/scsi-linux-sg.c Fri Feb 3 16:31:03 2006 *************** *** 120,126 **** * Choose your name instead of "schily" and make clear that the version * string is related to a modified source. */ ! LOCAL char _scg_trans_version[] = "scsi-linux-sg.c-1.86"; /* The version for this transport*/ #ifndef SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER #define SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER 0x5386 --- 120,126 ---- * Choose your name instead of "schily" and make clear that the version * string is related to a modified source. */ ! LOCAL char _scg_trans_version[] = "scsi-linux-sg.c-1.86+ma"; /* The version for this transport*/ #ifndef SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER #define SCSI_IOCTL_GET_BUS_NUMBER 0x5386 *************** *** 273,279 **** * return "schily" for the SCG_AUTHOR request. */ case SCG_AUTHOR: ! return (_scg_auth_schily); case SCG_SCCS_ID: return (__sccsid); case SCG_KVERSION: --- 273,279 ---- * return "schily" for the SCG_AUTHOR request. */ case SCG_AUTHOR: ! return (""); case SCG_SCCS_ID: return (__sccsid); case SCG_KVERSION: *************** *** 308,315 **** #ifdef USE_ATA scgo_ahelp(scgp, f); #endif - __scg_help(f, "ATA", "ATA Packet specific SCSI transport using sg interface", - "ATA:", "bus,target,lun", "1,2,0", TRUE, FALSE); return (0); } --- 308,313 ---- *************** *** 328,334 **** register int l; register int nopen = 0; char devname[64]; - BOOL use_ata = FALSE; if (busno >= MAX_SCG || tgt >= MAX_TGT || tlun >= MAX_LUN) { errno = EINVAL; --- 326,331 ---- *************** *** 338,381 **** busno, tgt, tlun); return (-1); } - if (device != NULL && *device != '\0') { #ifdef USE_ATA if (strncmp(device, "ATAPI", 5) == 0) { scgp->ops = &ata_ops; return (SCGO_OPEN(scgp, device)); } - #endif - if (strcmp(device, "ATA") == 0) { - /* - * Sending generic SCSI commands via /dev/hd* is a - * really bad idea when there also is a generic - * SCSI driver interface - it breaks the protocol - * layering model. A better idea would be to - * have a SCSI host bus adapter driver that sends - * the SCSI commands via the ATA hardware. This way, - * the layering model would be honored. - * - * People like Jens Axboe should finally fix the DMA - * bugs in the ide-scsi hostadaptor emulation module - * from Linux instead of publishing childish patches - * to the comment above. - */ - use_ata = TRUE; - device = NULL; - if (scgp->overbose) { - /* - * I strongly encourage people who believe that - * they need to patch this message away to read - * the messages in the Solaris USCSI libscg - * layer instead of wetting their tissues while - * being unwilling to look besides their - * own belly button. - */ - js_fprintf((FILE *)scgp->errfile, - "Warning: Using badly designed ATAPI via /dev/hd* interface.\n"); - } - } } if (scgp->local == NULL) { scgp->local = malloc(sizeof (struct scg_local)); --- 335,348 ---- busno, tgt, tlun); return (-1); } #ifdef USE_ATA + if (device != NULL && *device != '\0') { if (strncmp(device, "ATAPI", 5) == 0) { scgp->ops = &ata_ops; return (SCGO_OPEN(scgp, device)); } } + #endif if (scgp->local == NULL) { scgp->local = malloc(sizeof (struct scg_local)); *************** *** 389,396 **** scglocal(scgp)->drvers = -1; scglocal(scgp)->isold = -1; scglocal(scgp)->flags = 0; - if (use_ata) - scglocal(scgp)->flags |= LF_ATA; scglocal(scgp)->xbufsize = 0L; scglocal(scgp)->xbuf = NULL; --- 356,361 ---- *************** *** 403,415 **** } } - if (use_ata) - goto scanopen; - if ((device != NULL && *device != '\0') || (busno == -2 && tgt == -2)) goto openbydev; - scanopen: /* * Note that it makes no sense to scan less than all /dev/hd* devices * as even /dev/hda may be a device that talks SCSI (e.g. a ATAPI --- 368,376 ---- *************** *** 417,423 **** * look silly but there may be users that did boot from a SCSI hdd * and connected 4 CD/DVD writers to both IDE cables in the PC. */ ! if (use_ata) for (i = 0; i <= 25; i++) { js_snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), "/dev/hd%c", i+'a'); /* O_NONBLOCK is dangerous */ f = open(devname, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); --- 378,384 ---- * look silly but there may be users that did boot from a SCSI hdd * and connected 4 CD/DVD writers to both IDE cables in the PC. */ ! for (i = 0; i <= 25; i++) { js_snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), "/dev/hd%c", i+'a'); /* O_NONBLOCK is dangerous */ f = open(devname, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); *************** *** 433,439 **** if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! return (0); } } else { int iparm; --- 394,400 ---- if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! continue; } } else { int iparm; *************** *** 446,463 **** continue; } sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ if (sg_setup(scgp, f, busno, tgt, tlun, i)) return (++nopen); if (busno < 0 && tgt < 0 && tlun < 0) nopen++; } } ! if (use_ata && nopen == 0) ! return (0); if (nopen > 0 && scgp->errstr) scgp->errstr[0] = '\0'; ! if (nopen == 0) for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) { js_snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), "/dev/sg%d", i); /* O_NONBLOCK is dangerous */ f = open(devname, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); --- 407,424 ---- continue; } sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ + scglocal(scgp)->flags |= LF_ATA; if (sg_setup(scgp, f, busno, tgt, tlun, i)) return (++nopen); if (busno < 0 && tgt < 0 && tlun < 0) nopen++; } } ! if (nopen > 0 && scgp->errstr) scgp->errstr[0] = '\0'; ! for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) { js_snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), "/dev/sg%d", i); /* O_NONBLOCK is dangerous */ f = open(devname, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); *************** *** 473,479 **** if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! return (0); } } else { sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ --- 434,440 ---- if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! continue; } } else { sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ *************** *** 502,508 **** if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! return (0); } } else { sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ --- 463,469 ---- if (scgp->errstr) js_snprintf(scgp->errstr, SCSI_ERRSTR_SIZE, "Cannot open '%s'", devname); ! continue; } } else { sg_clearnblock(f); /* Be very proper about this */ *************** *** 523,541 **** if (b < 0 || b > 25) b = -1; } - if (scgp->overbose) { - /* - * Before you patch this away, are you sure that you - * know what you are going to to? - * - * Note that this is a warning that helps users from - * cdda2wav, mkisofs and other programs (that - * distinguish SCSI addresses from file names) from - * getting unexpected results. - */ - js_fprintf((FILE *)scgp->errfile, - "Warning: Open by 'devname' is unintentional and not supported.\n"); - } /* O_NONBLOCK is dangerous */ f = open(device, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK); /* if (f < 0 && errno == ENOENT)*/ --- 484,489 ---- *************** *** 634,645 **** } /* ! * The Linux kernel becomes more and more unmaintainable. ! * Every year, a new incompatible SCSI transport interface is added. ! * Each of them has it's own contradictory constraints. ! * While you cannot have O_NONBLOCK set during operation, at least one ! * of the drivers requires O_NONBLOCK to be set during open(). ! * This is used to clear O_NONBLOCK immediately after open() succeeded. */ LOCAL void sg_clearnblock(f) --- 582,588 ---- } /* ! * This is used to clear O_NONBLOCK immediately after open() succeeded. */ LOCAL void sg_clearnblock(f) -- Matthias Andree "Il semble que la perfection soit atteinte non quand il n'y a plus rien à ajouter, mais quand il n'y a plus rien à retrancher." A. de Saint-Exupéry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:20 ` [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] " Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 18:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:42 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:14 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. OK, I did not look at it and I never will! Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:31 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 18:42 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:10 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:14 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan On 02/03/06 07:31:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > Jörg This is an excellent example to verify how bad cdrecord developent is done..... Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:42 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 19:10 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:18 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:28 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 19:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jim; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > On 02/03/06 07:31:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > > > Jörg > > This is an excellent example to verify how bad cdrecord developent > is done..... Well, cdrecord is done as good as possible. Note that if peope send a patch together with personal infringements or untrue claims, the best I can do is to ignore alltogether. I did spend a lot of time with a fruitful discussion with Matthias. Then Matthias started this thread.... It now seems like Matthias does not like to be serious anymore. I am of course interested to make cdrecord better, but for the price of spending an ridiculously amount of time ob LKML. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:10 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 19:18 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:28 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan On 02/03/06 08:10:13PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > On 02/03/06 07:31:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > > > > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > > > > > Jörg > > > > This is an excellent example to verify how bad cdrecord developent > > is done..... > > Well, > > cdrecord is done as good as possible. The fact that you seem to sling mud at everyone that doesn't agree with you makes that seem questionable. > Note that if peope send a patch together with personal infringements or > untrue claims, the best I can do is to ignore alltogether. > > I did spend a lot of time with a fruitful discussion with Matthias. > Then Matthias started this thread.... It now seems like Matthias > does not like to be serious anymore. It's hard to have a serious discussion with you because you just keep parotting the same things and pointing fingers over and over. > I am of course interested to make cdrecord better, but for the price > of spending an ridiculously amount of time ob LKML. > > Jörg > And you never did answer my question about why cdrecord is the only app on any OS to use devicename:scsibus,target,lun to specify the target device. Every other tool out there, e.g. mount, fsck, tar, etc, all use the device name exported by the OS, e.g. /dev/c0t0s0d0, /dev/hda1, /dev/nst0, etc, so why is it necessary for cdrecord to be different? Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:10 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:18 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 19:28 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-08 22:13 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: jim, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > > > On 02/03/06 07:31:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > > > > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > > > > > Jörg > > > > This is an excellent example to verify how bad cdrecord developent > > is done..... > > Well, > > cdrecord is done as good as possible. Untrue. Proof: My patch makes it operate more smoothly on Linux. > Note that if peope send a patch together with personal infringements or > untrue claims, the best I can do is to ignore alltogether. Look who's talking, and what. Personal infringements? If you're sensitive, my apologies, I didn't mean to insult you. > I did spend a lot of time with a fruitful discussion with Matthias. > Then Matthias started this thread.... It now seems like Matthias > does not like to be serious anymore. I am absolutely serious about the patch and about my recent findings after looking at libscg. I just don't want my name tainted with accidents that happen during integration because you don't have a recent Linux installation. The RLIMIT_MEMLOCK was enough of an effort, my first patch would've worked, too, hence the GPL. > I am of course interested to make cdrecord better, but for the price > of spending an ridiculously amount of time ob LKML. Well, if you'd listened and attempted to understand our scanning concerns, you'd probably have had libscg use a unified ATA:/SCSI: namespace in Linux for 1½ years. OK, spilled milk. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:28 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-08 22:13 ` Pavel Machek 2006-02-09 20:10 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-09 22:38 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-02-08 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling, jim, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan Hi! > > > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > > > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > > > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > > > > > > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > > > > > > > Jörg > > > > > > This is an excellent example to verify how bad cdrecord developent > > > is done..... > > > > Well, > > > > cdrecord is done as good as possible. > > Untrue. Proof: My patch makes it operate more smoothly on Linux. ... > I just don't want my name tainted with accidents that happen during > integration because you don't have a recent Linux installation. The > RLIMIT_MEMLOCK was enough of an effort, my first patch would've worked, > too, hence the GPL. Well, mailing patch with notice that it is not okay to modify it is strange behaviour, and if I was Joerg, I'd just drop that patch, too. If you really want the patch applied, submit it anonymously or something like that. Pavel -- Thanks, Sharp! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-08 22:13 ` Pavel Machek @ 2006-02-09 20:10 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-09 22:38 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: jerome lacoste @ 2006-02-09 20:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, jim, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan On 2/8/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: [...] > > I just don't want my name tainted with accidents that happen during > > integration because you don't have a recent Linux installation. The > > RLIMIT_MEMLOCK was enough of an effort, my first patch would've worked, > > too, hence the GPL. > > Well, mailing patch with notice that it is not okay to modify it is > strange behaviour, and if I was Joerg, I'd just drop that patch, too. That would be true except if Joerg hadn't started with the exact same behavior. It would seem that Joerg would be capable of understanding the irony there. But maybe if Joerg would move his pride out of the way for 30 seconds, have a decent look at the patch, return a technical commentary (or point to an existing one), we could move on. I am sure that Matthias would be pretty happy to return a better patch. That would make everybody happy. Matthias, can you resend the patch, without your notice? Let's see if Joerg look at it this time. > If you really want the patch applied, submit it anonymously or > something like that. Anonymous submission is not good for tracability reasons... Jerome ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-08 22:13 ` Pavel Machek 2006-02-09 20:10 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-02-09 22:38 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-10 12:11 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-09 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pavel Machek; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, jim, linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan On Wed, 08 Feb 2006, Pavel Machek wrote: > > I just don't want my name tainted with accidents that happen during > > integration because you don't have a recent Linux installation. The > > RLIMIT_MEMLOCK was enough of an effort, my first patch would've worked, > > too, hence the GPL. > > Well, mailing patch with notice that it is not okay to modify it is > strange behaviour, and if I was Joerg, I'd just drop that patch, too. You have apparently missed that I offered to relicense the patch under MIT license (which is liberal, allows modifications and everything) after I'd confirmed the integration went OK; and I was just returning the buck of being forced to change interface identifications all over the map from "mustn't modify" sections. The first step would be to look at the patch nonetheless, because it conveys information that Jörg has not extracted from messages since the first time SG_IO in ide-cd cropped up. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-09 22:38 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-10 12:11 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-10 12:24 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-10 22:20 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-10 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: pavel, matthias.andree; +Cc: schilling, linux-kernel, jim, cdwrite, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > You have apparently missed that I offered to relicense the patch under > MIT license (which is liberal, allows modifications and everything) It seems that you still miss the point that you don't have the right to require a license for your patch (check the UrhG for more information). And please finally note that you did already cause a mail thread that did cost more time than your patch is worth. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-10 12:11 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-10 12:24 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-10 22:20 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: jerome lacoste @ 2006-02-10 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: pavel, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, cdwrite, acahalan On 2/10/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: [...] > And please finally note that you did already cause a mail thread that > did cost more time than your patch is worth. How can you know that if you didn't look at it? J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-10 12:11 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-10 12:24 ` jerome lacoste @ 2006-02-10 22:20 ` Matthias Andree 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-10 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: Linux-Kernel mailing list Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-10: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > You have apparently missed that I offered to relicense the patch under > > MIT license (which is liberal, allows modifications and everything) > > It seems that you still miss the point that you don't have the right > to require a license for your patch (check the UrhG for more information). Why do care then? > And please finally note that you did already cause a mail thread that > did cost more time than your patch is worth. Nobody forces you to answer every side note someone makes, and nobody ask you to reiterate identical replies over and over. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 18:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:42 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 19:14 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 20:08 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! Perhaps you should -- the patch impairs your changes to get needless device enumeration changes into the kernel... Enforcing your strict interpretation of GPL v2 §§ 2a, 2c to the letter was your own idea. I had to touch "modification prohibited" sections to remove obsolete (bogus) warnings. I'll amend the license: Show me your integrated patch. If it works properly on my computer and without false warnings, you add a note to the changelog and the AN-2.01.01a06 file, I will demote the patch's license to the MIT license as in <http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php>. Yes, this is a license contract offer as per the BGB. Just write you're accepting it, or accept implicitly by sending the integration patch against 2.01.01a05. I just want to make sure that it doesn't bear my name if the integration breaks it again. The code can probably be simplified even more with readdir() on /dev and filtering it (avoiding glob() buffer issues), my patch doesn't even attempt to do that. And if you explain the use of LF_ATA, the kernel drivers might even be fixes so that /dev/hd* looks confusably similar to /dev/sg*. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 19:14 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 20:08 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 21:17 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, matthias.andree; +Cc: linux-kernel, cdwrite, acahalan Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > > > Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > So patches to the rescue -- please review the patch below (for 2.01.01a05). > > > Note that GPL 2a and 2c apply, so you cannot merge a modified version of > > > my patch without adding a tag that you goofed my fixes. > > > > OK, I did not look at it and I never will! > > Perhaps you should -- the patch impairs your changes to get > needless device enumeration changes into the kernel... Well, the problem with your last mail is that it is full of idioligy. I am of course willing to discuss useful ideas, but believe me that you will have no luck if you leave a technical based discussion. > I'll amend the license: Show me your integrated patch. If it works > properly on my computer and without false warnings, you add a note to > the changelog and the AN-2.01.01a06 file, I will demote the patch's > license to the MIT license as in See: http://bundesrecht.juris.de/urhg/ I hope this helps you to understand things better.Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 20:08 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 21:17 ` Matthias Andree 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-02-03 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling, Linux-Kernel mailing list Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-03: > Well, the problem with your last mail is that it is full of idioligy. It is not my patch's or the discussion's fault if you cannot accept the same rules as you are trying to impose on others. > I am of course willing to discuss useful ideas, but believe me that you > will have no luck if you leave a technical based discussion. Then have a look at the patch, we'll discuss the license later. My offer to relicense under MIT license if the integration works out for me stands. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 13:29 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:25 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2006-02-02 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Crilly Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > being burned. IO priorities are the correct solution... Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell @ 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:54 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:56 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-03 13:29 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Revell Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On 02/02/06 04:25:50PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > > being burned. > > IO priorities are the correct solution... > > Lee Is this something that's available now? Jim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-02 21:54 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:56 ` Lee Revell 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2006-02-02 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Crilly Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:49 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > On 02/02/06 04:25:50PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > > > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > > > being burned. > > > > IO priorities are the correct solution... > > > > Lee > > Is this something that's available now? > Yes but only in the CFQ IO scheduler, and a pre-release util-linux is required to get the docs and command line utils. Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:54 ` Lee Revell @ 2006-02-02 21:56 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-03 8:54 ` Jens Axboe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2006-02-02 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Crilly Cc: Jan Engelhardt, Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:49 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > On 02/02/06 04:25:50PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > > > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > > > being burned. > > > > IO priorities are the correct solution... > > > > Lee > > Is this something that's available now? > Hmm, actually I'm not sure it would make a difference, as I don't think CD writing goes through the regular IO scheduler. Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:56 ` Lee Revell @ 2006-02-03 8:54 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2006-02-03 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Revell Cc: Jim Crilly, Jan Engelhardt, Albert Cahalan, Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j On Thu, Feb 02 2006, Lee Revell wrote: > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:49 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > On 02/02/06 04:25:50PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > > > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > > > > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > > > > being burned. > > > > > > IO priorities are the correct solution... > > > > > > Lee > > > > Is this something that's available now? > > > > Hmm, actually I'm not sure it would make a difference, as I don't think > CD writing goes through the regular IO scheduler. Right, you can only prioritize "regular" io, not stuff sent with SG_IO. So it'll help burning only for the case of getting the data required to the buffer, not in getting that data out to the burner. The latter is usually not a problem though, as these requests take a 'short cut' directly to the dispatch queue. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly @ 2006-02-03 13:29 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rlrevell, jim Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, j, acahalan Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 16:09 -0500, Jim Crilly wrote: > > Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > > being burned. > > IO priorities are the correct solution... No, they are not. The correct solution is to implement "hald" in a _cooperative_ way like e.g. vold on Solaris. The main point is not to poll to frequent (Solaris does once everz 3 seconds) and to use SCSI commands only that to not interrupt or disturb CD/DVD-writing. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 13:29 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 13:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 16:47 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: rlrevell, jim, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan > >The main point is not to poll to frequent (Solaris does once everz 3 seconds) >and to use SCSI commands only that to not interrupt or disturb CD/DVD-writing. > I do not have any problems with resmgr/hal ATM (SUSE Linux 10.0). Although hal [seems to] probes more often than once/3sec, it did not interrupt any of my cd writing processes. Maybe that's already a feature of cdrecord*, I don't know. (With an older drive (AOpen CRW1232), the whole IDE bus was even blocked when blanking, leaving no option but to wait.) Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 13:51 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 16:48 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 16:47 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: Joerg Schilling, rlrevell, jim, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 02:51:10PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > >The main point is not to poll to frequent (Solaris does once everz 3 seconds) > >and to use SCSI commands only that to not interrupt or disturb CD/DVD-writing. > > > > I do not have any problems with resmgr/hal ATM (SUSE Linux 10.0). Although > hal [seems to] probes more often than once/3sec, It polls every 2 seconds. > it did not interrupt any > of my cd writing processes. Maybe that's already a feature of cdrecord*, I > don't know. I don't know of any problem in that area and almost every modern Linux desktop has HAL running these days, so I'm sure somebody would have complained. Kay ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 16:48 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: kay.sievers, jengelh Cc: schilling, rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, James, j, acahalan Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 02:51:10PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > > >The main point is not to poll to frequent (Solaris does once everz 3 seconds) > > >and to use SCSI commands only that to not interrupt or disturb CD/DVD-writing. > > > > > > > I do not have any problems with resmgr/hal ATM (SUSE Linux 10.0). Although > > hal [seems to] probes more often than once/3sec, > > It polls every 2 seconds. What SCSI commands does it use? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-03 13:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kay Sievers @ 2006-02-03 16:47 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, jengelh Cc: rlrevell, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jim, James, j, acahalan Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > >The main point is not to poll to frequent (Solaris does once everz 3 seconds) > >and to use SCSI commands only that to not interrupt or disturb CD/DVD-writing. > > > > I do not have any problems with resmgr/hal ATM (SUSE Linux 10.0). Although > hal [seems to] probes more often than once/3sec, it did not interrupt any > of my cd writing processes. Maybe that's already a feature of cdrecord*, I > don't know. > (With an older drive (AOpen CRW1232), the whole IDE bus was even > blocked when blanking, leaving no option but to wait.) If you like to investigate on this, you would need to e.g. use cdrecord to write a DVD on a Pioneer DVD writer of check a notebook with only one ATA cable for both HDD and DVD-writer. The fact that it does work for you does not prove that there is no problem. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell @ 2006-02-03 13:25 ` Joerg Schilling 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-03 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jim, jengelh Cc: schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, j, acahalan "Jim Crilly" <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net> wrote: > I see the same thing with, the only external kernel patch I have > applied is Suspend2. The ATA scanbus code tries to > open("/dev/hda", O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK|O_EXCL) and that fails, and since > the scanning code stops once one device fails to open the whole scan > aborts. Apparently O_EXCL was added by Ubuntu and Debian to stop > burns being corrupted by hald polling the device while a disc is > being burned. If you want to read the entire thread it's bug #262678 > in Debian. This is an excellent example to verify how bad Linux distribution developent is done..... Note that the main problem here is an applicaion unfriendly service on Linux that disturbes other applications like cdrecord. As there is a bug in this service, I would expect that this bug should be fixed. Instead of doing this or at least trying to get help from experienced people like me, some people did prefer to change cdrecord in a way that caused more problems than it pretends to fix. Note that the "requirement" for O_EXCL is a bad idea and needs fixing. If you believe that this is impossible, just have a look at the OpenSolaris vold and volfs subsystem..... Note that Linux distributors apply other changes to cdrecord that causes problems in the same area: patching cdrecord to allow a grace time < 3 seconds of course disallows a useful solution in this area. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* [OT] Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-02-01 15:39 ` Jan Engelhardt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-02-01 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juerg Billeter Cc: Joerg Schilling, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, James, acahalan >> Users like to be able to get a list of posible targets for a single protocol. >> Nobody would ever think about trying to prevent people from getting a unified >> view on the list possible hosts that talk TCP/IP. What cdrecord does with >> -scanbus is nothing really different. > >Well, please show me how to get the list of all possible hosts that talk >TCP/IP and are directly or indirectly connected to my computer. As my >computer is attached to the internet, the list would get pretty long... >And even if only considering hosts in the local network, how do you get >a unified view of all TCP/IP hosts conected to any of my two network >adapters? > For direct connections (0 hop inbetween), spew pings around the local network, look into the ARP table and try to TCP-connect to everyone listed. Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter @ 2006-01-31 16:43 ` Paul Jakma 2006-02-01 5:07 ` Albert Cahalan 4 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Paul Jakma @ 2006-01-31 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James, acahalan On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote: > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen > from outside the Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular > device into a unique SCSI driver system although it would be > apropriate. So let's get this straight: Linux is artificially limiting userspace from viewing devices in terms of parallel SCSI address (B/T/L) because it does not create such B/T/L addresses, ones which would hence be *artificial* themselves, for non-parallel-SCSI devices? regards, -- Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: zeal, n.: Quality seen in new graduates -- if you're quick. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-31 16:43 ` Paul Jakma @ 2006-02-01 5:07 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-01 21:45 ` Paul Jakma 0 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-01 5:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: paul Cc: Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James On 1/31/06, Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie> wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > What Linux does is to artificially prevent this view to been seen > > from outside the Linux kernel, or to avoid integrating a particular > > device into a unique SCSI driver system although it would be > > apropriate. > > So let's get this straight: Linux is artificially limiting userspace > from viewing devices in terms of parallel SCSI address (B/T/L) > because it does not create such B/T/L addresses, ones which would > hence be *artificial* themselves, for non-parallel-SCSI devices? There is a slim chance that Joerg might really believe that Linux has an internal B/T/L view of everything. That would be odd to us of course. He has clearly been spending time with the Solaris kernel. If his only kernel experience comes from systems that do make up a phony B/T/L view, then he might just assume that all operating systems are designed this way. For Joerg's reference, open() goes like this: 1. the /dev name 2. the inode 3. the device number 4. pointers to structs full of function pointers Nowhere is it in B/T/L form. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-02-01 5:07 ` Albert Cahalan @ 2006-02-01 21:45 ` Paul Jakma 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Paul Jakma @ 2006-02-01 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan Cc: Joerg Schilling, j, mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, jengelh, James On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Albert Cahalan wrote: > For Joerg's reference, open() goes like this: > > 1. the /dev name > 2. the inode > 3. the device number > 4. pointers to structs full of function pointers > > Nowhere is it in B/T/L form. And, for whatever it's worth, TTBOMK Solaris does not arrange SCSI into a B/T/L address hierarchy internally either. regards, -- Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Mystics always hope that science will some day overtake them. -- Booth Tarkington ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 17:38 ` Jürg Billeter @ 2006-01-30 21:02 ` Bill Davidsen 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Bill Davidsen @ 2006-01-30 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; > Cdrecord is a program that needs to be able to send any SCSI command as > it needs to be able to add new vendor unique commands for new drive/feature > support. On this we do agree, drive vendors seem to add every new feature with a vendor code. Some are NOT required to write CD, but some are needed to write "better" CDs, for some definition of better which could mean faster, more reliable, special modes, etc. -- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 16:44 ` James Courtier-Dutton 2006-01-27 17:01 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-30 11:25 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-30 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, James Cc: mrmacman_g4, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan, unlisted-recipients:; James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.co.uk> wrote: > Would you be able to add the appropriate kernel bugzilla numbers? As before people from LKML did not like to even talk about these bugs, I did stop after sending bug reports to LKML. > I think it might also be useful to make a list of all the SCSI commands > that cdrecord uses. Including all the vendor specific ones. One could > then verify that the Linux kernel is passing them onto the device correctly. It is simple to find the SCSI commands that cdrecord by scanning the source (*), but this is something that is subject to frequent change in case cdrecord needs to add new MMC-4711 commands or in case that I need to add a new vendor unique command in order to support special features. *) Just grep for "cdb.cmd" Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-25 16:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-26 8:19 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-26 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On 1/25/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > > BTW, before Joerg mentions portability, I'd like to remind > > everyone that all modern OSes support the use of normal device > > names for SCSI. The most awkward is FreeBSD, where you have > > to do a syscall or two to translate the name to Joerg's very > > non-hotplug non-iSCSI way of thinking. Windows, MacOS X, and > > even Solaris all manage to handle device names just fine. In > > numerous cases, not just Linux, cdrecord is inventing crap out > > of thin air to satisfy a pre-hotplug worldview. > > Looks like you are badly informed, so I encourage you to get yourself informed > properly before sending your next postig.... > > libscg includes 22 different SCSI low level transport implementations. > > - Only 5 of them allow a /dev/hd* device name related access. > > - 11 of them use file descriptors as handles for sending SCSI > commands but do not have a name <-> fs relation and thus > _need_ a SCSI device naming scheme as libscg offers. > This is because there is no 1:1 relation between SCSI addressing > and a fd retrieved from a /dev/* entry. > > - 6 of them not even allow to get a file descriptors as handles for > sending SCSI commands. These platforms of course need the SCSI device > naming scheme as libscg offers. > > Conclusion: > > 17 Platforms _need_ the addressing scheme libscg offers > > 5 Platforms _may_ use a different access method too. > > NOTE: Amongst the 6 plaforms that do not allow to even get a file descriptor > there is a modern OS like MacOS X You can't fool me, because I looked at the cdrecord source code and at the documented APIs for various OSes. It's misleading to say that MacOS doesn't allow a file descriptor. MacOS has something similar to what Linux has, but not in the normal filesystem namespace. You specify a name to get a handle. Of course, on MacOS, Joerg also uses -scanbus to create nonsense. Names can be handled by Windows, FreeBSD, MacOS X, Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and IRIX. That's everything that isn't end-of-lifed. The rest of your 22 platforms are dead and dying things that are unlikely to be upgrading to the latest software or hardware, assuming they survived the Y2K bug. It's old stuff like the Amiga, the NeXT, etc. Using numbers for CD burners is like trying to send email to the IP address of the recipient, which half-way worked until DHCP was invented. Wait, we could have all email clients offer a -scannet option. :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-26 8:19 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 13:53 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Albert Cahalan wrote: > It's misleading to say that MacOS doesn't allow a file > descriptor. MacOS has something similar to what Linux > has, but not in the normal filesystem namespace. You > specify a name to get a handle. Of course, on MacOS, > Joerg also uses -scanbus to create nonsense. OK, so Jörg created this "nonsense", i. e. a triple of stupid numbers, and claims he's using them to provide device lists to applications. What prevents any of these GUIs from treating the "name" as an opaque string? How would ATA:4,0,0 be different from 2,2,0 or /dev/hdc? And how is the phantom GUI application obtaining the data? It needs to scan all buses anyhow, and run -scanbus for each and every "transport identifier" to get a grip of all devices, because cdrecord-with-libscg is too stupid to do that by itself and unlist inferior (in its view, or in the public view) identifiers (such as the PIO-only ATAPI:). Here's an idea: recognizing cdrecord may be portable, I wonder if it (or libscg for that matter) is extensible or made decisions where it can decouple its devices from the GUI application. Stating that the device ID no matter how it looks today would be an opaque string not to be processed by the GUI might be a first step to gain the necessary degrees of freedom to change to ATA:/dev/hdc or just /dev/hdc (I don't mind which). > Using numbers for CD burners is like trying to send email > to the IP address of the recipient, which half-way worked > until DHCP was invented. Wait, we could have all email > clients offer a -scannet option. :-) Well, in PeeCees, the BIOS presents that list of primary/secondary master/slave, so there's /some/ point in it. Once hotplug comes into play, it's all vain though. (removing Lee from the Cc: list) -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 8:19 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 13:53 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 13:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: matthias.andree, acahalan; +Cc: schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > > It's misleading to say that MacOS doesn't allow a file > > descriptor. MacOS has something similar to what Linux > > has, but not in the normal filesystem namespace. You > > specify a name to get a handle. Of course, on MacOS, > > Joerg also uses -scanbus to create nonsense. > > OK, so Jörg created this "nonsense", i. e. a triple of stupid numbers, > and claims he's using them to provide device lists to applications. More than 2/3 of all current OS use this way of adressing and it is a standard: (CAM). > Well, in PeeCees, the BIOS presents that list of primary/secondary > master/slave, so there's /some/ point in it. Once hotplug comes into > play, it's all vain though. Hotplug is only a problem when implemented in a sub-optimal way. Please have a look at Solaris for hot plug support with stable interface names.... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-26 8:19 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, acahalan; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > > Conclusion: > > > > 17 Platforms _need_ the addressing scheme libscg offers > > > > 5 Platforms _may_ use a different access method too. > > > > NOTE: Amongst the 6 plaforms that do not allow to even get a file descriptor > > there is a modern OS like MacOS X > > You can't fool me, because I looked at the cdrecord source > code and at the documented APIs for various OSes. I am sorry to see that you did not look close enough... > It's misleading to say that MacOS doesn't allow a file > descriptor. MacOS has something similar to what Linux > has, but not in the normal filesystem namespace. You > specify a name to get a handle. Of course, on MacOS, > Joerg also uses -scanbus to create nonsense. > > Names can be handled by Windows, FreeBSD, MacOS X, > Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and IRIX. > That's everything that isn't end-of-lifed. Aha, so you like to state that MS-WIN is end-of-lifed? Is this secret new information from Microsoft? Solaris is not on this list, because the only way to send SCSI commands to any kind of SCSI target is by using my /dev/scg driver. AIX is not on this list because the only way to send SCSI commands to any target is by using the /dev/gsc driver from Mathew Jacob who is a former Sun employee and who did get the idea for this driver from a talk with me during a visit at Sun in 1987. FreeBSD is not on the list as it uses CAM, similar to BeOS (Zeta), OSF1 (True 64) and QNX. IRIX is not on this list because it uses the same kind of interface as e.g. HP-UX does snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), "/dev/scsi/sc%dd%dl%d", busno, tgt, tlun); Next try please.... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled 2006-01-27 11:05 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:42 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Matan Peled @ 2006-01-26 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: acahalan, rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel Joerg Schilling wrote: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: >> Names can be handled by Windows, FreeBSD, MacOS X, >> Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and IRIX. >> That's everything that isn't end-of-lifed. > Aha, so you like to state that MS-WIN is end-of-lifed? > Is this secret new information from Microsoft? I'm not an expert in SCSI implementation quirks across varying platfroms, but you made a mistake here, Joerg. Albert put Windows (==MS-WIN) in that list. First one, even. -- [Name ] :: [Matan I. Peled ] [Location ] :: [Israel ] [Public Key] :: [0xD6F42CA5 ] [Keyserver ] :: [keyserver.kjsl.com] encrypted/signed plain text preferred ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled @ 2006-01-27 11:05 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2006-01-27 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: schilling, chaosite; +Cc: rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel, acahalan Matan Peled <chaosite@gmail.com> wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Names can be handled by Windows, FreeBSD, MacOS X, > >> Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and IRIX. > >> That's everything that isn't end-of-lifed. > > Aha, so you like to state that MS-WIN is end-of-lifed? > > Is this secret new information from Microsoft? > > I'm not an expert in SCSI implementation quirks across varying platfroms, but > you made a mistake here, Joerg. > > Albert put Windows (==MS-WIN) in that list. First one, even. I encourage you to inform yourself about MS-WIN and to find you that you are wrong. Under MS-WIN, you use either ASPI -> no open fd at all or you use something that is very similar to my /dev/scg* device on Solaris which uses/defines abstract SCSI transport devices instead of possibly unknown high level devices like a disk driver. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled @ 2006-01-26 18:42 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-26 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: acahalan, rlrevell, matthias.andree, linux-kernel >IRIX is not on this list because it uses the same kind of interface as >e.g. HP-UX does > > snprintf(devname, sizeof (devname), > "/dev/scsi/sc%dd%dl%d", busno, tgt, tlun); So, would you want something like (free format string imagination) "/dev/sg-%d-%d-%d", busno, tgt, lun on Linux? Jan Engelhardt -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled 2006-01-26 18:42 ` Jan Engelhardt @ 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-27 0:40 ` Kyle Moffett ` (3 more replies) 2 siblings, 4 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-27 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joerg Schilling; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel On 1/26/06, Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> wrote: > > You can't fool me, because I looked at the cdrecord source > > code and at the documented APIs for various OSes. > > I am sorry to see that you did not look close enough... ... > > Names can be handled by Windows, FreeBSD, MacOS X, > > Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and IRIX. > > That's everything that isn't end-of-lifed. OK, this is getting silly and downright offensive. I encourage everyone else to look over the code to see that I am right. I may just be crazy enough to fork this project. I very nearly did about 18 months ago. I can't very well do this alone, because I don't have all the hardware. (It's either cdrecord or Asterisk -- I'm not sure which one pisses me off the most) Me: * was an RTOS developer * day job is all about secure software * the procps maintainer * running Linux 2.6.xx only * using FireWire, which is totally hot-plug Perhaps the first thing to do would be to find a list of all the apps that depend on cdrecord. Their interface to cdrecord needs to be documented so that a compatibility script can be made. Matthias, can you give me a hand with this? I'll need a way to sort and publish incoming patches, letting them sit for a while. (like what Andrew Morton does for the kernel) This can't work like procps because the hardware varies too much. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan @ 2006-01-27 0:40 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 8:21 ` Xavier Bestel ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-27 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On Jan 26, 2006, at 19:19, Albert Cahalan wrote: > I may just be crazy enough to fork this project. I very nearly did > about 18 months ago. I can't very well do this alone, because I > don't have all the hardware I will gladly test your fork on my various hardware here. I have a desktop with Apple CD/RW+DVDROM and generic DVD+/-RW DL drive, and a laptop with Apple DVD+/-RW drive. Just send or post patches somewhere and I'll take a look. I suggest starting by looking at some of the various distro patches, IIRC some of them have already make significant cleanups. > Matthias, can you give me a hand with this? I'll need a way to sort > and publish incoming patches, letting them sit for a while. (like > what Andrew Morton does for the kernel) This can't work like procps > because the hardware varies too much. Might I suggest quilt or stgit? Both allow you to maintain an unstable and highly variable stack of patches based off a more stable branch, from which some patches percolate down into stable occasionally. Good luck with this! Cheers, Kyle Moffett -- Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible -- Alan Kay ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-27 0:40 ` Kyle Moffett @ 2006-01-27 8:21 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-01-27 8:26 ` DervishD 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Xavier Bestel @ 2006-01-27 8:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 01:19, Albert Cahalan wrote: > I may just be crazy enough to fork this project. I very nearly > did about 18 months ago. I can't very well do this alone, > because I don't have all the hardware. Then contribute code to libburn: <http://icculus.org/burn/> Xav ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-27 0:40 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 8:21 ` Xavier Bestel @ 2006-01-27 8:26 ` DervishD 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen 3 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: DervishD @ 2006-01-27 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan; +Cc: Joerg Schilling, matthias.andree, linux-kernel Hi Albert :) * Albert Cahalan <acahalan@gmail.com> dixit: > I may just be crazy enough to fork this project. I very nearly > did about 18 months ago. I can't very well do this alone, > because I don't have all the hardware. You can count on a Plextor Premium and a AOpen 1616ARR here. I also have another Plextor DVD708 but it no longer writes CDs :(( I will gladly test your fork here. And of course, you can count on any writer I can put my hands on. Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2006-01-27 8:26 ` DervishD @ 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen 2006-01-30 21:57 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 22:12 ` Lee Revell 3 siblings, 2 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Bill Davidsen @ 2006-01-30 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Albert Cahalan; +Cc: matthias.andree, linux-kernel Albert Cahalan wrote: > OK, this is getting silly and downright offensive. I encourage > everyone else to look over the code to see that I am right. > > I may just be crazy enough to fork this project. I very nearly > did about 18 months ago. I can't very well do this alone, > because I don't have all the hardware. (It's either cdrecord > or Asterisk -- I'm not sure which one pisses me off the most) I can test on various 2.6 kernel ATAPI CD and DVD burners, and on 2.4 kernel even a real SCSI CD burner as long as it lasts. I would love to see some mutual cooperation, but I doubt it's going to happen. Just to be clear, Joerg is not the only one I think has been a problem here, he pissed off some of the developers who don't seem overly eager to do things which would be helpful for any burner software. From here it looks like a pissing content, with users well within splash range. > > * was an RTOS developer > * day job is all about secure software > * the procps maintainer > * running Linux 2.6.xx only > * using FireWire, which is totally hot-plug > > Perhaps the first thing to do would be to find a list of all the > apps that depend on cdrecord. Their interface to cdrecord > needs to be documented so that a compatibility script can > be made. Do you plan on changing the interface, then? Removing the SCSI stuff completely? Do bear in mind that there are still SCSI burners and people using them, and cdrecord is currently portable to many operating systems. > > Matthias, can you give me a hand with this? I'll need a way > to sort and publish incoming patches, letting them sit for a > while. (like what Andrew Morton does for the kernel) This > can't work like procps because the hardware varies too much. Look a year down the road, when we have have two (or more) new 25GB optical formats coming out, probably with new features and commands and several vendors building drives for them. Both formats have DRM stuff in them, and GPL 3 forbids implementing DRM (simplification). Better you than me, but it will be exciting. To the extent that I have the hardware I'll be glad to test. -- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen @ 2006-01-30 21:57 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 22:12 ` Lee Revell 1 sibling, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bill Davidsen; +Cc: Albert Cahalan, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Just to be clear, Joerg is not the only one I think has been a problem > here, he pissed off some of the developers who don't seem overly eager > to do things which would be helpful for any burner software. From here > it looks like a pissing content, with users well within splash range. Well, Jörg is not giving us answers to the extent that might convince a Linux kernel hacker to change things, except for a few handrails besides the staircase, such as Ted's suggestion WRT RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, or people offering to fix ide-tape to talk SG_IO - Jörg however has not yet documented how ide-tape fixes are relevant for the CD writing application (no doubt that a SCSI /GENERAL/ interface library has interest in such, it does not matter to the CD writing topic). > Look a year down the road, when we have have two (or more) new 25GB > optical formats coming out, probably with new features and commands and > several vendors building drives for them. Both formats have DRM stuff in > them, and GPL 3 forbids implementing DRM (simplification). I find it fascinating that everyone talks about the first public GPL v3 draft as though it were the final version. Now is the time to express concerns, for instance, the GPL's incompatibility, to the FSF. And no, I do not have current plans to work on a cdrecord fork as it is. -- Matthias Andree ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen 2006-01-30 21:57 ` Matthias Andree @ 2006-01-30 22:12 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-16 16:15 ` Bill Davidsen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 207+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-30 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bill Davidsen; +Cc: Albert Cahalan, matthias.andree, linux-kernel On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 16:49 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Look a year down the road, when we have have two (or more) new 25GB > optical formats coming out, probably with new features and commands > and several vendors building drives for them. Both formats have DRM > stuff in them, and GPL 3 forbids implementing DRM (simplification). Who cares what GPL 3 says, the kernel is GPL2. Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
* Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) 2006-01-30 22:12 ` Lee Revell @ 2006-02-16 16:15 ` Bill Davidsen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 207+ messages in thread From: Bill Davidsen @ 2006-02-16 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Revell; +Cc: Albert Cahalan, matthias.andree, linux-kernel Lee Revell wrote: >On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 16:49 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > >>Look a year down the road, when we have have two (or more) new 25GB >>optical formats coming out, probably with new features and commands >>and several vendors building drives for them. Both formats have DRM >>stuff in them, and GPL 3 forbids implementing DRM (simplification). >> >> > >Who cares what GPL 3 says, the kernel is GPL2. > Did you miss the subject? My reply was to a suggestion that cdrecord (it's not the kernel!) be forked, and discussion of what license MIGHT apply. I was making an information point about an application which is very important to a lot of people. -- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 207+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-02-16 16:12 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 207+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-01-25 2:58 CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) Albert Cahalan 2006-01-25 16:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 16:56 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-25 17:08 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-25 17:18 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 17:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 9:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 10:34 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-26 14:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:23 ` Gene Heskett 2006-01-26 19:38 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-27 5:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2006-01-27 13:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-27 14:09 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 23:28 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 11:09 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-25 18:17 ` Jens Axboe 2006-01-25 17:14 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-25 18:05 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-26 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 10:40 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 14:05 ` Joerg Schilling [not found] ` <20060126103004.07e02876.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> 2006-01-26 15:30 ` sean 2006-01-25 23:08 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 12:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 17:55 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:10 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 18:28 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 18:38 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-26 19:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2006-01-26 19:24 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-26 19:22 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:21 ` Vojtech Pavlik 2006-01-26 19:28 ` Diego Calleja 2006-01-26 19:44 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-01-26 20:13 ` Diego Calleja 2006-01-27 14:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-27 16:44 ` James Courtier-Dutton 2006-01-27 17:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-30 11:43 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 12:04 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 12:23 ` Christoph Hellwig 2006-01-30 16:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-04 11:17 ` Christoph Hellwig 2006-01-30 16:12 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 16:30 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 16:34 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-30 17:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-01 15:01 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-30 16:35 ` Jeff Garzik 2006-01-30 16:46 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-01 15:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 17:01 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 16:17 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 11:32 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:45 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-30 17:38 ` Jürg Billeter 2006-01-31 10:30 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 11:11 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 13:27 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:41 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-01 15:19 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 21:49 ` Ian Kester-Haney 2006-02-02 9:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 9:54 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 10:14 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 12:10 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-01-31 13:35 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:42 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-31 13:49 ` Martin Mares 2006-01-31 14:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-01 15:34 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:49 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-02 9:49 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 10:20 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 11:28 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 12:46 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 10:21 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 13:18 ` Jens Axboe 2006-02-02 16:12 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-31 12:24 ` jerome lacoste 2006-01-31 12:33 ` Oliver Neukum 2006-01-31 12:44 ` Denis Vlasenko 2006-02-01 15:37 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 15:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch 2006-02-02 15:24 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-01 15:56 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 2006-02-01 16:28 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-01 17:51 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-02-02 7:59 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 11:19 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:34 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 12:51 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 13:02 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-03 9:55 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:05 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 13:57 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:57 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-02-02 13:24 ` grundig 2006-02-03 10:06 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 10:39 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 16:20 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 8:11 ` Alexander Samad 2006-01-31 12:32 ` Juerg Billeter 2006-01-31 13:37 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-31 13:44 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 6:28 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 11:17 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 11:37 ` grundig 2006-02-02 12:15 ` Martin Mares 2006-02-02 12:24 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 16:18 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 17:17 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-02 20:39 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-02 21:09 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-02 21:46 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 13:36 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 2:27 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-03 13:47 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 15:20 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 15:53 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 16:54 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 17:49 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-03 18:35 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 18:57 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:04 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:13 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 18:45 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 18:37 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-04 15:35 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-04 15:43 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-04 18:33 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 7:40 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 16:04 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-05 16:15 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-05 17:50 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-02-05 21:15 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-05 22:27 ` Neil Brown 2006-02-06 11:15 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-06 14:58 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-06 18:17 ` Krzysztof Halasa 2006-02-06 18:37 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-09 16:09 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:50 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 20:47 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-03 21:06 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-04 0:02 ` Olivier Galibert 2006-02-04 16:56 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 16:10 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 16:56 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:15 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-04 11:08 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 19:22 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 20:01 ` Phillip Susi 2006-02-03 18:20 ` [cdrtools PATCH (GPL)] " Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 18:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 18:42 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:10 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 19:18 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-03 19:28 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-08 22:13 ` Pavel Machek 2006-02-09 20:10 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-09 22:38 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-10 12:11 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-10 12:24 ` jerome lacoste 2006-02-10 22:20 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 19:14 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-03 20:08 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 21:17 ` Matthias Andree 2006-02-02 21:25 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:49 ` Jim Crilly 2006-02-02 21:54 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-02 21:56 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-03 8:54 ` Jens Axboe 2006-02-03 13:29 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:51 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kay Sievers 2006-02-03 16:48 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 16:47 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-03 13:25 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-02-01 15:39 ` [OT] " Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-31 16:43 ` Paul Jakma 2006-02-01 5:07 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-02-01 21:45 ` Paul Jakma 2006-01-30 21:02 ` Bill Davidsen 2006-01-30 11:25 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 2:26 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-26 8:19 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-26 13:53 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 13:50 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 16:56 ` Matan Peled 2006-01-27 11:05 ` Joerg Schilling 2006-01-26 18:42 ` Jan Engelhardt 2006-01-27 0:19 ` Albert Cahalan 2006-01-27 0:40 ` Kyle Moffett 2006-01-27 8:21 ` Xavier Bestel 2006-01-27 8:26 ` DervishD 2006-01-30 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen 2006-01-30 21:57 ` Matthias Andree 2006-01-30 22:12 ` Lee Revell 2006-02-16 16:15 ` Bill Davidsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).