Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Mar 24), Julian Elischer said: > >>John Baldwin wrote: >> >>>On Mar 23, 2005, at 9:00 PM, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: >>> >>>>On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Julian Elischer wrote: >>>> >>>>>eject should imply a detach.. >>>>>i.e. I think your patch should call the detach code from the eject >>>>>code. >>>> >>>>Eject is for devices that support removable media. >> >>that doesn't mean that an eject shouldn't do all teh work for a >>detach as well. > > > I would be extremely surprised if a "camcontrol eject cd0" removed > /dev/cd0 :) Eject is for devices whose media can be removed, but the > device itself stays. > > Or are you just saying detach should do an eject (possibly a stop also) > first? > Let me reinforce this since there seems to be quite a bit of confusion. The 'stop' and 'eject' actions of camcontrol operate in the context of how they are defined in the SCSI world. That is, they send a particular command to the target that makes the target do the intended action. They do __not__ imply that CAM will detach the logical device, flush the buffer-cache, etc. There is a whole lot less magic here than I think that everyone is hoping for. ScottReceived on Thu Mar 24 2005 - 19:13:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:30 UTC