Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive - Storage

This is a discussion on Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive - Storage ; On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:53:58 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote: > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB, these do > not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways and they > work only with ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

  1. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:53:58 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote:
    > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB, these do
    > not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways and they
    > work only with the respective tools for specifically that chipset.
    >
    > Arno


    Hi all,

    Here is a page that claims to list all known USB-to-IDE bridge devices,
    and whether or not it is possible to transport SMART data over them:
    http://www.hdsentinel.com/usbharddisks.php (from the makers of "Hard Disk
    Sentinel" software).

    Of course, as others have pointed out, this relies on non-standard
    extensions of the USB mass storage protocol, since the official standard
    does /not/ support SMART-over-USB. As far as a I know, the only free/open-
    source software support for these non-standard extensions is in
    smartmontools' support for some Cypress chips: http://
    smartmontools.sourceforge.net/faq.html#testinghelp

    Dan


  2. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Dan Lenski wrote:
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:53:58 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote:
    >> As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB, these do
    >> not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways and they
    >> work only with the respective tools for specifically that chipset.
    >>
    >> Arno


    > Hi all,


    > Here is a page that claims to list all known USB-to-IDE bridge devices,
    > and whether or not it is possible to transport SMART data over them:
    > http://www.hdsentinel.com/usbharddisks.php (from the makers of "Hard Disk
    > Sentinel" software).


    Interesting. A short look at all my enclosures shows that
    - Cutie 2.5" case (0x067b/0x2507): supported
    - Revoltec Alu Book Ed. 2 (0x04fc/0x0x15): supported
    - Agrosy HD360U-P (0x0840/0x0098): not listed, i.e. unknown
    - Jou Jye Venus DS3 (0x152d/0x2336): supported
    - WD Elements 1TB (0x1058/0x1001): supported

    4/5 supported and 1/5 unknown according to their list. Not bad.

    In addition there is a lot of good and honest SMART information on
    their pages. They do "get" it, including that for useful disk
    healt assessment you have to look at the raw attributes.

    This looks like a pretty good product for a very reasonable price.
    I think we should recommend this to anybody looking for something
    commercial under Windows (that may also work with USB in many cases)
    in the future.


    > Of course, as others have pointed out, this relies on non-standard
    > extensions of the USB mass storage protocol, since the official standard
    > does /not/ support SMART-over-USB. As far as a I know, the only free/open-
    > source software support for these non-standard extensions is in
    > smartmontools' support for some Cypress chips: http://
    > smartmontools.sourceforge.net/faq.html#testinghelp


    The problem here is that you basically need a new implementation
    for each chipset. Takes time and is annoying. Hopefully vendors
    will move to the now-defined passthrough standard soon.

    Arno


  3. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:56:31 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote:

    >> Here is a page that claims to list all known USB-to-IDE bridge devices,
    >> and whether or not it is possible to transport SMART data over them:
    >> http://www.hdsentinel.com/usbharddisks.php (from the makers of "Hard
    >> Disk Sentinel" software).

    >
    > Interesting. A short look at all my enclosures shows that
    > - Cutie 2.5" case (0x067b/0x2507): supported - Revoltec Alu Book Ed. 2
    > (0x04fc/0x0x15): supported - Agrosy HD360U-P (0x0840/0x0098): not
    > listed, i.e. unknown - Jou Jye Venus DS3 (0x152d/0x2336): supported -
    > WD Elements 1TB (0x1058/0x1001): supported
    >
    > 4/5 supported and 1/5 unknown according to their list. Not bad.


    Lucky you! One of my 2.5" enclosures is unknown (Moai M110E chip) and the
    other is apparently "impossible" (Alcor AU6390). I've looked at the data
    sheets for both, and there's no mention of any ATA passthrough.

    You'll probably get more info on your unknown enclosure if you look at
    what chip it uses.

    >> Of course, as others have pointed out, this relies on non-standard
    >> extensions of the USB mass storage protocol, since the official
    >> standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB. As far as a I know, the
    >> only free/open- source software support for these non-standard
    >> extensions is in smartmontools' support for some Cypress chips: http://
    >> smartmontools.sourceforge.net/faq.html#testinghelp

    >
    > The problem here is that you basically need a new implementation for
    > each chipset. Takes time and is annoying. Hopefully vendors will move to
    > the now-defined passthrough standard soon.


    Yes, indeed. Though I've looked at the code for the Cypress chips, and
    it's extremely straightforward. So *if* you can get the necessary docs,
    it should be very easy to add support for other enclosures that support
    passthrough.

    Dan


  4. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Arno Wagner wrote in news:6k3itfF5pp1kU1@mid.individual.net
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Dan Lenski wrote:
    > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:53:58 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote:
    > > > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB, these do
    > > > not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways and they
    > > > work only with the respective tools for specifically that chipset.
    > > >
    > > > Arno

    >
    > > Hi all,

    >
    > > Here is a page that claims to list all known USB-to-IDE bridge devices,
    > > and whether or not it is possible to transport SMART data over them:
    > > http://www.hdsentinel.com/usbharddisks.php (from the makers of "Hard Disk
    > > Sentinel" software).


    > Interesting. A short look at all my enclosures shows that
    > - Cutie 2.5" case (0x067b/0x2507): supported
    > - Revoltec Alu Book Ed. 2 (0x04fc/0x0x15): supported
    > - Agrosy HD360U-P (0x0840/0x0098): not listed, i.e. unknown
    > - Jou Jye Venus DS3 (0x152d/0x2336): supported
    > - WD Elements 1TB (0x1058/0x1001): supported


    > 4/5 supported and 1/5 unknown according to their list. Not bad.


    And nicely shows what a clueless idiot you are and always have been, babblebot.

    >
    > In addition there is a lot of good and honest SMART information on
    > their pages. They do "get" it, including that for useful disk
    > healt assessment you have to look at the raw attributes.
    >
    > This looks like a pretty good product for a very reasonable price.
    > I think we should recommend this to anybody looking for something
    > commercial under Windows (that may also work with USB in many cases)
    > in the future.
    >
    >
    > > Of course, as others have pointed out, this relies on non-standard
    > > extensions of the USB mass storage protocol, since the official standard
    > > does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.


    As long as it supports USB passthrough is doesn't need to.

    > > As far as a I know, the only
    > > free/open-source software support for these non-standard extensions
    > > is in smartmontools' support for some Cypress chips: http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net...ml#testinghelp

    >
    > The problem here is that you basically need a new implementation
    > for each chipset. Takes time and is annoying. Hopefully vendors
    > will move to the now-defined passthrough standard soon.
    >
    > Arno


  5. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Dan Lenski wrote in news:PPTCk.1390$as4.1009@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:53:58 +0000, Arno Wagner wrote:
    > > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB, these do
    > > not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways and they
    > > work only with the respective tools for specifically that chipset.
    > >
    > > Arno

    >
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Here is a page that claims to list all known USB-to-IDE bridge devices,
    > and whether or not it is possible to transport SMART data over them:
    > http://www.hdsentinel.com/usbharddisks.php (from the makers of "Hard Disk
    > Sentinel" software).
    >
    > Of course, as others have pointed out, this relies on non-standard
    > extensions of the USB mass storage protocol,


    > since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.


    Yes it does.
    The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution is.
    The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    SMART driver extensions.

    > As far as a I know, the only free/open-
    > source software support for these non-standard extensions is in
    > smartmontools' support for some Cypress chips:
    > > http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net...ml#testinghelp

    >
    > Dan


  6. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Arno Wagner wrote in news:6jfme6F31665U1@mid.individual.net
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Guy wrote:
    > > HL0105 wrote:

    >
    > > > Looking for a freeware utility that will give me S.M.A.R.T.
    > > > information on an external USB hard drive.
    > > >

    >
    >
    > > S.M.A.R.T. Monitoring Tools
    > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/


    > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB,


    There isn't either for transport SMART over IDE adapters/controllers.

    > these do not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized
    > ways and they work only with the respective tools for specifically
    > that chipset.
    >
    > Arno


  7. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    "Squeeze" wrote in message
    news:48deb22a$0$22190$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
    > Arno Wagner wrote in news:6jfme6F31665U1@mid.individual.net
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Guy wrote:
    >>
    >> > S.M.A.R.T. Monitoring Tools
    >> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/

    >
    >> As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB,

    >
    > There isn't either for transport SMART over IDE adapters/controllers.
    >

    FolkNazi does it again! The SMART IOCTL was there 10 years ago.

    >> these do not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized
    >> ways and they work only with the respective tools for specifically
    >> that chipset.
    >>
    >> Arno



  8. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:

    >> since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.

    >
    > Yes it does.
    > The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    > is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    > commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    > SMART driver extensions.


    I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...

    I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    a device.

    If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.

    Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    implement the full capabilities of the device.)

    Dan

  9. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Eric Gisin wrote in news:gbojul$t85$1@news.mixmin.net
    > "Squeeze" wrote in message
    > news:48deb22a$0$22190$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com...
    > > Arno Wagner wrote in news:6jfme6F31665U1@mid.individual.net
    > > > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Guy wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > S.M.A.R.T. Monitoring Tools
    > > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/

    > >
    > > > As there is no standardized vau to transport SMART over USB,

    > >
    > > There isn't either for transport SMART over IDE adapters/controllers.


    > FolkNazi does it again! The SMART IOCTL was there 10 years ago.


    "The SMART system is a technology that monitors and predicts device performance. The SMART IOCTL API specification version 1.1 or
    later, published by Compaq Computer Corporation and Microsoft Corporation, describes the API used by a program to issue SMART
    commands to an IDE drive in Windows 98. In Windows, the API is implemented in a vendor-specific driver named Smartvsd.vxd"

    IOW,
    No provision for Smartvsd.vxd in the IDE driver, No SMART information.

    Thank you, Gisin Newbie.

    >
    > > > these do not work. Only some (few) chipsets have non-standardized ways
    > > > and they work only with the respective tools for specifically that chipset.
    > > >
    > > > Arno



  10. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    changed encoding of message to western european.

    Daniel Lenski wrote in newsPPDk.1910$D32.1057@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com
    > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:
    >
    > > > since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.

    > >
    > > Yes it does.
    > > The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    > > is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    > > commands, others do not by lacking the necessary hookup points for the
    > > SMART driver extensions.


    > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...


    So maybe you better refrain from answering until you do.

    USB allows encapsulating any data you want.
    There isn't much need for that if there is no means of doing that
    from the software aspect. Then all you need to do is incorporate
    that call in one of your own that encapsulates the SMART command.

    >
    > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    > a device.


    No, that is what you are saying now. That's not what you said before.

    >
    > If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    > thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.


    Yes, the physical capability and a driver extension module supplying the
    necessary call for SMART software to use.

    >
    > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    > through capabilities,


    Which is of no help without the necessary software calls, if they did.

    > and this is perfectly compliant with the standard unfortunately.


    > (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it either...


    The driver has to support the call that transfers SMART data.

    No such call, no such access, that simple.
    That's why Cypress supply their own Mass Storage driver.

    > of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    > implement the full capabilities of the device.)


    Which covers most all drivers.

    >
    > Dan


  11. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Lenski wrote:
    > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:


    >>> since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.

    >>
    >> Yes it does.
    >> The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    >> is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    >> commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    >> SMART driver extensions.


    > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...


    > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    > a device.


    > If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    > thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.


    > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    > through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    > unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    > either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    > implement the full capabilities of the device.)


    Ignore "Squeeze". He has no clue what he is talking about.

    Arno

  12. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Arno Wagner wrote in news:6kb2a1F6tkkaU1@mid.individual.net
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Lenski wrote:
    > > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:

    >
    > > > > since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.
    > > >
    > > > Yes it does.
    > > > The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    > > > is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    > > > commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    > > > SMART driver extensions.

    >
    > > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...

    >
    > > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    > > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    > > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    > > a device.

    >
    > > If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    > > thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.

    >
    > > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    > > through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    > > unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    > > either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    > > implement the full capabilities of the device.)


    > Ignore "Squeeze". He has no clue what he is talking about.


    Yes, please do.
    Squeeze and Folkert Rienstra have consistently said that it is possible
    to do SMART over USB in theory. Obviously they have no clue.

    Arno Wagner on the other hand said that it wasn't possible at all.
    Then he said it was possible with some chipsets.
    Then he said that most drives he owns even support it.

    Obviously Arno Wagner is the best source for your information.
    Long live Arno Wagner.

    >
    > Arno


  13. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Odie wrote:
    > Arno Wagner wrote in news:6kb2a1F6tkkaU1@mid.individual.net
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Lenski wrote:
    >> > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:

    >>
    >> > > > since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.
    >> > >
    >> > > Yes it does.
    >> > > The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    >> > > is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    >> > > commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    >> > > SMART driver extensions.

    >>
    >> > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...

    >>
    >> > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    >> > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    >> > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    >> > a device.

    >>
    >> > If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    >> > thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.

    >>
    >> > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    >> > through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    >> > unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    >> > either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    >> > implement the full capabilities of the device.)


    >> Ignore "Squeeze". He has no clue what he is talking about.


    > Yes, please do.
    > Squeeze and Folkert Rienstra have consistently said that it is possible
    > to do SMART over USB in theory. Obviously they have no clue.


    > Arno Wagner on the other hand said that it wasn't possible at all.
    > Then he said it was possible with some chipsets.
    > Then he said that most drives he owns even support it.


    > Obviously Arno Wagner is the best source for your information.
    > Long live Arno Wagner.


    And another truely pathetic faked posting by somebody that
    nobody listens to anymore. This is not Odie.

    Incidentially the whole discussion is about standardized ways,
    not vendor extensions. Something consistently ignored by said
    incompetents.

    Arno

  14. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Odie schrieb:
    > Arno Wagner wrote in news:6kb2a1F6tkkaU1@mid.individual.net
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Lenski wrote:
    >>> On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:
    >>>>> since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.
    >>>> Yes it does.
    >>>> The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    >>>> is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    >>>> commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    >>>> SMART driver extensions.
    >>> I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...
    >>> I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    >>> (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    >>> *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    >>> a device.
    >>> If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    >>> thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.
    >>> Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    >>> through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    >>> unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    >>> either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    >>> implement the full capabilities of the device.)

    >
    >> Ignore "Squeeze". He has no clue what he is talking about.

    >
    > Yes, please do.
    > Squeeze and Folkert Rienstra have consistently said that it is possible
    > to do SMART over USB in theory. Obviously they have no clue.
    >
    > Arno Wagner on the other hand said that it wasn't possible at all.
    > Then he said it was possible with some chipsets.
    > Then he said that most drives he owns even support it.
    >
    > Obviously Arno Wagner is the best source for your information.
    > Long live Arno Wagner.
    >
    >> Arno


    And obviously some people prefer bashing other people's information (via
    multiple aliases) over providing anything useful themselves...

  15. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Squeeze wrote:

    >> I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...

    >
    > So maybe you better refrain from answering until you do.


    Communicating one's opinion is usually seen as a good way to achieve
    mutual understanding.

    > USB allows encapsulating any data you want. There isn't much need for
    > that if there is no means of doing that from the software aspect. Then
    > all you need to do is incorporate that call in one of your own that
    > encapsulates the SMART command.


    I'm well aware of that. There is a big difference between *allowing* any
    data, and *mandating* proper handling of a specific type of data.

    >> I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    >> (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    >> *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART
    >> on a device.

    >
    > No, that is what you are saying now. That's not what you said before.


    Okay, I think you're quibbling about the word "support". What I stated
    before was (quote): "the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-
    USB"

    You're right, I should have said, "the official standard does /not/
    require or specify SMART-over-USB". Happier now? :-)

    >> Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    >> through capabilities,

    >
    > Which is of no help without the necessary software calls, if they did.


    Well, I have the software skills, so I'd be much happier if the hardware I
    own supported it.

    > The driver has to support the call that transfers SMART data.
    >
    > No such call, no such access, that simple. That's why Cypress supply
    > their own Mass Storage driver.


    Interesting. I haven't looked too much at how SMART support works under
    Windows. Under Linux, all UMS devices use the same driver, and there's a
    user-space API to issue arbitrary SCSI-encapsulated commands to the
    devices, which can be used for pass-through or other vendor extensions.
    (For example, I have a digital camera that can be controlled through USB
    using some vendor extensions on top of the UMS driver.)

    Dan

  16. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Jesco Lincke wrote in news:gbqd6r$eqh$1@online.de
    > Odie schrieb:
    > > Arno Wagner wrote in news:6kb2a1F6tkkaU1@mid.individual.net
    > > > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Daniel Lenski wrote:
    > > > > On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:39 +0100, Squeeze wrote:
    > > > > > > since the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB.
    > > > > > Yes it does.
    > > > > > The problem is whether the driver will allow using whatever the solution
    > > > > > is. The same problem exist with IDE drivers. Some support passing SMART
    > > > > > commands, others do not by lacking necessary the hookup points for the
    > > > > > SMART driver extensions.
    > > > > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...
    > > > > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    > > > > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    > > > > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART on
    > > > > a device.
    > > > > If some particular USB-to-IDE bridge supports pass-through, this is *not*
    > > > > thanks to the standard, but because of a vendor extension.
    > > > > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    > > > > through capabilities, and this is perfectly compliant with the standard
    > > > > unfortunately. (And I'm not sure what drivers have to do with it
    > > > > either... of course it's possible to write a driver that doesn't
    > > > > implement the full capabilities of the device.)

    > >
    > > > Ignore "Squeeze". He has no clue what he is talking about.

    > >
    > > Yes, please do.
    > > Squeeze and Folkert Rienstra have consistently said that it is possible
    > > to do SMART over USB in theory. Obviously they have no clue.
    > >
    > > Arno Wagner on the other hand said that it wasn't possible at all.
    > > Then he said it was possible with some chipsets.
    > > Then he said that most drives he owns even support it.
    > >
    > > Obviously Arno Wagner is the best source for your information.
    > > Long live Arno Wagner.
    > >
    > > > Arno


    > And obviously some people prefer bashing other people's information (via
    > multiple aliases) over providing anything useful themselves...


    Which of course becomes a self fulfilling prophecy when people like your
    self use extensive killfiles to prevent "anything useful" filtering through.

    Btw, someone finally says something nice about Arno Wagner and not even
    a Wagner shill like yourself believe him. What has the world become to.

  17. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Dan Lenski wrote in news:bO6Ek.1755$as4.120@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com
    > On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:06:22 +0100, Squeeze wrote:
    >
    > > > I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, but...

    > >
    > > So maybe you better refrain from answering until you do.


    > Communicating one's opinion is usually seen as a good way to achieve
    > mutual understanding.


    Responding without having a clue to what you are responding to, isn't.

    >
    > > USB allows encapsulating any data you want. There isn't much need
    > > for that if there is no means of doing that from the software aspect.
    > > Then all you need to do is incorporate that call in one of your own that
    > > encapsulates the SMART command.


    > I'm well aware of that.


    Which didn't exactly show through in your response.

    > There is a big difference between *allowing* any data, and
    > *mandating* proper handling of a specific type of data.


    That's what you have error handling for.

    >
    > > > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards document
    > > > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf) does
    > > > *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for performing SMART
    > > > on a device.

    > >
    > > No, that is what you are saying now. That's not what you said before.


    > Okay, I think you're quibbling about the word "support".


    That in combination with the word "Standard".

    > What I stated before was (quote): "the official standard does /not/ support SMART-over-USB"
    >
    > You're right, I should have said, "the official standard does /not/
    > require or specify SMART-over-USB". Happier now? :-)


    Just a little. The problem is with "standard". There isn't just one standard,
    there are many. So when you say Standard and USB in one sentence you say
    "USB standard". The USB standard doesn't exclude SMART over USB.

    Supposedly when you said "the standard" you meant to say "that standard".
    'That' being the document describing the minimum capabilities of a Mass Storage driver and Firmware capabilities of a Mass Storage
    Device.
    Unfortunately I see very little of that in the document that you (presumably) refer to: usbmassbulk_10.pdf. Perhaps I missed it.

    >
    > > > Some USB-to-IDE bridge chips simply *do not* have any documented pass-
    > > > through capabilities,

    > >
    > > Which is of no help without the necessary software calls, if they did.

    >
    > Well, I have the software skills, so I'd be much happier if the hardware I
    > own supported it.
    >
    > > The driver has to support the call that transfers SMART data.
    > >
    > > No such call, no such access, that simple. That's why Cypress supply
    > > their own Mass Storage driver.

    >
    > Interesting. I haven't looked too much at how SMART support works under
    > Windows. Under Linux, all UMS devices use the same driver, and there's a
    > user-space API to issue arbitrary SCSI-encapsulated commands to the
    > devices, which can be used for pass-through or other vendor extensions.


    Right, your drivers support that API.
    Without such support that API goes nowhere.

    > (For example, I have a digital camera that can be controlled through USB
    > using some vendor extensions on top of the UMS driver.)
    >
    > Dan



  18. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:47:14 +0100, Squeeze wrote:

    > Dan Lenski wrote in news:bO6Ek.1755$as4.120@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com
    >> Communicating one's opinion is usually seen as a good way to achieve
    >> mutual understanding.

    >
    > Responding without having a clue to what you are responding to, isn't.


    Well we seem to have cleared up the issue, right? So I don't see a
    problem.

    >> > > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards
    >> > > document
    >> > > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf)
    >> > > does *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for
    >> > > performing SMART on a device.
    >> >
    >> > No, that is what you are saying now. That's not what you said before.

    >
    >> Okay, I think you're quibbling about the word "support".

    >
    > That in combination with the word "Standard".
    >
    >> What I stated before was (quote): "the official standard does /not/
    >> support SMART-over-USB"
    >>
    >> You're right, I should have said, "the official standard does /not/
    >> require or specify SMART-over-USB". Happier now? :-)

    >
    > Just a little. The problem is with "standard". There isn't just one
    > standard, there are many. So when you say Standard and USB in one
    > sentence you say "USB standard". The USB standard doesn't exclude SMART
    > over USB.


    Again, I didn't intend to state that anything was excluded... only to
    specify the /minimum capabilities required/ by the UMS standards document.

    > Supposedly when you said "the standard" you meant to say "that
    > standard". 'That' being the document describing the minimum capabilities
    > of a Mass Storage driver and Firmware capabilities of a Mass Storage
    > Device.


    From the context of my original post, I think it was quite clear that I
    was referring to the same standard as in the previous sentence.

    > Unfortunately I see very little of that in the document that you
    > (presumably) refer to: usbmassbulk_10.pdf. Perhaps I missed it.


    The document describes in detail the binary protocol for communication
    with a UMS device. And it specifies the particular command set,
    encapsulated within that protocol, that a device must support in order to
    comply with the standard.

    Furthermore, the document does not require--but neither does it exclude--
    the possibility that a UMS device may support additional commands or
    interfaces, such as might be used to implement ATA passthrough.

    What's there to miss?

    (And I never mentioned firmware. By which I assume you mean "a program
    executed by a microcontroller in the USB device.")

    >> Interesting. I haven't looked too much at how SMART support works
    >> under Windows. Under Linux, all UMS devices use the same driver, and
    >> there's a user-space API to issue arbitrary SCSI-encapsulated commands
    >> to the devices, which can be used for pass-through or other vendor
    >> extensions.

    >
    > Right, your drivers support that API. Without such support that API goes
    > nowhere.


    Agreed.

    Dan


  19. Re: Get S.M.A.R.T. information on external USB hard drive

    Dan Lenski wrote in news:YhhEk.1308$W06.213@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com
    > On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:47:14 +0100, Squeeze wrote:
    >
    > > Dan Lenski wrote in news:bO6Ek.1755$as4.120@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com
    > > > Communicating one's opinion is usually seen as a good way to achieve
    > > > mutual understanding.

    > >
    > > Responding without having a clue to what you are responding to, isn't.


    > Well we seem to have cleared up the issue, right? So I don't see a
    > problem.


    We'll see.

    >
    > > > > > I was simply stating that the USB Mass Storage Class standards
    > > > > > document
    > > > > > (http://www.usb.org/developers/devcla...assbulk_10.pdf)
    > > > > > does *not* explicitly require or specify any mechanism for
    > > > > > performing SMART on a device.
    > > > >
    > > > > No, that is what you are saying now. That's not what you said before.

    > >
    > > > Okay, I think you're quibbling about the word "support".

    > >
    > > That in combination with the word "Standard".
    > >
    > > > What I stated before was (quote): "the official standard does /not/
    > > > support SMART-over-USB"
    > > >
    > > > You're right, I should have said, "the official standard does /not/
    > > > require or specify SMART-over-USB". Happier now? :-)

    > >
    > > Just a little. The problem is with "standard". There isn't just one
    > > standard, there are many. So when you say Standard and USB in one
    > > sentence you say "USB standard". The USB standard doesn't exclude SMART
    > > over USB.

    >
    > Again, I didn't intend to state that anything was excluded... only to
    > specify the /minimum capabilities required/ by the UMS standards document.


    You are repeating yourself.

    >
    > > Supposedly when you said "the standard" you meant to say "that
    > > standard". 'That' being the document describing the minimum capabilities
    > > of a Mass Storage driver and Firmware capabilities of a Mass Storage
    > > Device.


    > From the context of my original post, I think it was quite clear that
    > I was referring to the same standard as in the previous sentence.


    To you. Not to me apparently and I am your audience, not just you yourself.

    >
    > > Unfortunately I see very little of that in the document that you
    > > (presumably) refer to: usbmassbulk_10.pdf. Perhaps I missed it.


    > The document describes in detail the binary protocol for communication
    > with a UMS device.


    I believe that that could be somewhat accurate.

    > And it specifies the particular command set, encapsulated within that
    > protocol, that a device must support in order to comply with the standard.


    I'm sorry, but I can't find it.

    >
    > Furthermore, the document does not require--but neither does it exclude--
    > the possibility that a UMS device may support additional commands
    > or interfaces, such as might be used to implement ATA passthrough.
    >
    > What's there to miss?


    Well, you tell me.
    I'm looking for that elusive command set that by omission shows that
    SMART is not supported. It's not there. There is no mention of it.
    By that token you can say that either everything is supported or nothing
    is supported.

    >
    > (And I never mentioned firmware. By which I assume you mean "a program
    > executed by a microcontroller in the USB device.")


    So you didn't, so what?

    >
    > > > Interesting. I haven't looked too much at how SMART support works
    > > > under Windows. Under Linux, all UMS devices use the same driver, and
    > > > there's a user-space API to issue arbitrary SCSI-encapsulated commands
    > > > to the devices, which can be used for pass-through or other vendor
    > > > extensions.

    > >
    > > Right, your drivers support that API. Without such support that API goes
    > > nowhere.

    >
    > Agreed.
    >
    > Dan



+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2