Re: WD_QUIRK_FORCE_LBA48

[der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> Even that much could be avoided by the "cap at 128G and fall back to
>> non-LBA48 on error", unless there exist interfaces which react to
>> LBA48 accesses with neither correct LBA48 operation nor an easily
>> detectible and retryable error.  Er, unless such interfaces exist
>> and are common enough to care about - we can't work around _all_
>> broken hardware.
> It's not broken.  These controllers were designed before LBA48 was
> specified.

Sure, it's not broken for them to fail to provide LBA48 operation.

But, depending on exactly how LBA48 works, it might be fair to call
them broken if they don't produce an easily detectible error.  (I don't
know much about LBA48, but I'd tend to assume it's something like the
difference between 6-byte and 10-byte SCSI commands; if so, not
producing an error does seem broken to me.)

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B