From: nospam@needed.invalid   
      
   On 2/11/2024 9:30 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   > On 2024-02-10 16:46, bad sector wrote:   
   >   
   > ...   
   >   
   >> Are some adapters better than others?   
   >   
   > Yes, but there is no way to know in advance.   
   >   
   > Some list a maximum disk size.   
   >   
      
   In many cases, that is the "maximum size we have tested with".   
      
   I have seen adverts, that one year claim the adapter worked   
   with a 2TB drive, and then a few years later, it advertises   
   that it handles 8TB drives. There are several CDB formats,   
   and there is room in 48-bit LBAs to handle some pretty big disks.   
   The plumbing is big enough for good sized disks.   
      
   It's certainly true, that there have been quirks in the past.   
   Like the NAS that could not handle more than a 200GB drive   
   (a nice round number that has nothing to do with hardware standards).   
   That was a software issue (as that thing used a processor   
   and some sort of OS).   
      
   And you would expect with UASP, that it would be using a CDB   
   for the LBA address purpose. The protocol does not have to be   
   UASP, but the stack might still use SCSI CDB anyway. Both   
   Windows and Linux, use SCSI for glue. Check the very last   
   line in this article, for inspiration, as to where a SCSI CDB   
   might be hiding.   
      
   https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/driver-api/scsi.html   
      
      Paul   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)