From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267678AbUHPPI0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:08:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267684AbUHPPI0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:08:26 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:42973 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267678AbUHPPH7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:07:59 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:07:51 -0700 From: Pete Zaitcev To: "O.Sezer" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, zaitcev@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4] blacklist a device in usb-storage Message-Id: <20040816080751.733c188d@lembas.zaitcev.lan> In-Reply-To: <412066BC.9040503@ttnet.net.tr> References: <20040815235204.0e9ec874@lembas.zaitcev.lan> <412066BC.9040503@ttnet.net.tr> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.11claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:48:12 +0300 "O.Sezer" wrote: > > I do not understand what the objective might be. Just do not > > use that thing with Linux kernel 2.4. Why do you wish "to revent > > usb-storage from taking over this disk"? > As I said above, I cannot prevent accidentals (VID/PIDs aren't > printed on the disk, yo know...) And usb-storage must not deal > with disks that it cannot deal with: > 1. This particular disk can lead to panics as I said. > 2. If someone ever writes a driver specific to this device (I > know it's less than highly unlikely), than it would be also > useful in that case if the disk isn't tried to be owned by > usb-storage. That, I think applies as a general case, too. The #2 only makes sense when such driver appears. As for #1, why don't you post the dmesg from your "panic". -- Pete