[PATCH v3] usb: usb-storage: No additional quirks need to be added to the EL-R12 optical drive.

[Chen Changcheng]

The optical drive of EL-R12 has the same vid and pid as INIC-3069,
as follows:
T: Bus=02 Lev=02 Prnt=02 Port=01 Cnt=01 Dev#= 3 Spd=5000 MxCh= 0
D: Ver= 3.00 Cls=00(>ifc ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 9 #Cfgs= 1
P: Vendor=13fd ProdID=3940 Rev= 3.10
S: Manufacturer=HL-DT-ST
S: Product= DVD+-RW GT80N
S: SerialNumber=423349524E4E38303338323439202020
C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=80 MxPwr=144mA
I:* If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=08(stor.) Sub=02 Prot=50 Driver=usb-storage
E: Ad=83(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS=1024 Ivl=0ms
E: Ad=0a(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS=1024 Ivl=0ms

This will result in the optical drive device also adding
the quirks of US_FL_NO_ATA_1X. When performing an erase operation,
it will fail, and the reason for the failure is as follows:
[ 388.967742] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 Send: scmd 0x00000000d20c33a7
[ 388.967742] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 CDB: ATA command pass through(12)/Blank a1 11 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
[ 388.967773] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 Done: SUCCESS Result: hostbyte=DID_TARGET_FAILURE driverbyte=DRIVER_OK cmd_age=0s
[ 388.967773] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 CDB: ATA command pass through(12)/Blank a1 11 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
[ 388.967803] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 Sense Key : Illegal Request [current]
[ 388.967803] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 Add. Sense: Invalid field in cdb
[ 388.967803] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 scsi host busy 1 failed 0
[ 388.967803] sr 5:0:0:0: Notifying upper driver of completion (result 8100002)
[ 388.967834] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] tag#0 0 sectors total, 0 bytes done.

For the EL-R12 standard optical drive, all operational commands
and usage scenarios were tested without adding the IGNORE_RESIDUE quirks,
and no issues were encountered. It can be reasonably concluded
that removing the IGNORE_RESIDUE quirks has no impact.

Signed-off-by: Chen Changcheng <chencha...@kylinos.cn>
---
drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h b/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h
index 1477e31d7763..b695f5ba9a40 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ UNUSUAL_DEV(0x125f, 0xa94a, 0x0160, 0x0160,
US_FL_NO_ATA_1X),

/* Reported-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin....@redhat.com> */
-UNUSUAL_DEV(0x13fd, 0x3940, 0x0000, 0x9999,
+UNUSUAL_DEV(0x13fd, 0x3940, 0x0309, 0x0309,
"Initio Corporation",
"INIC-3069",
USB_SC_DEVICE, USB_PR_DEVICE, NULL,

base-commit: e9a6fb0bcdd7609be6969112f3fbfcce3b1d4a7c
--
2.25.1

[Alan Stern]

You know, to keep the changes to a minimum I think the bcdDevice range
should be 0x0000 - 0x0309. We can't be sure which models need the
NO_ATA_1X quirk, since there doesn't seem to be any record in the
mailing list archives of the discussion leading up to the original
unusual_uas.h entry.

Alan Stern

[Chen Changcheng]

index 1477e31d7763..939a98c2d3f7 100644

--- a/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/unusual_uas.h
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ UNUSUAL_DEV(0x125f, 0xa94a, 0x0160, 0x0160,
US_FL_NO_ATA_1X),

/* Reported-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin....@redhat.com> */
-UNUSUAL_DEV(0x13fd, 0x3940, 0x0000, 0x9999,

+UNUSUAL_DEV(0x13fd, 0x3940, 0x0000, 0x0309,

[Alan Stern]

Isn't this actually v4?

Where's the changelog with respect to the previous version?

Alan Stern

[Chen Changcheng]

[Greg KH]

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:

- This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what
needs to be done here to properly describe this.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot