RESERVATION CONFLICT AND ACA ACTIVE

Charles Monia, SHR3-2/W3, 237-6757 16-Aug-1994 1708 monia at starch.enet.dec.com
Tue Aug 16 14:06:11 PDT 1994


Gerry Houlder wrote in part:

==========================================
...... I don't think it is a good idea to add wording in various spots to
define this priority. It is better to add a clause that specifically defines
the priority of the various statuses and conditions, so it is in only one place
in the document. Then the spot referred to by Giles (and other spots as well)
can use wording like "shall report [this condition] unless a higher priority
status or condition exists for that LUN". SCSI has always had wording like this
but has never defined what the priority should be.
===========================================

I agree with Gerry's suggestion. I would suggest deleting the current wording
in clause 4.6.5 and adding the following paragraph to 4.2 "Status" to define
the reporting precedence when several conditions exist concurrently.

"If more than one condition applies to a completed task, a condition associated 
with a BUSY, RESERVATION CONFLICT, ACA ACTIVE or TASK SET FULL status shall be 
reported in preference to any other condition associated with the task."

Comments?


Charles Monia







More information about the T10 mailing list