PERSISTENT RESERVE/RESERVE Interoperability

Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
Tue Oct 16 20:08:05 PDT 2001


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
*

If a drive has a registration for persistent reservation, it is required to
respond to a RESERVE(6) or RESERVE(10) command with reservation conflict
status. This behavior is defined in the model section of SPC that discusses
the reservation behavior.





"Kevin D Butt" <kdbutt at us.ibm.com>@t10.org on 10/16/2001 04:52:22 PM

Sent by:  owner-t10 at t10.org


To:   t10 at t10.org
cc:

Subject:  PERSISTENT RESERVE/RESERVE Interoperability


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Kevin D Butt" <kdbutt at us.ibm.com>
*
Can anybody tell me what is the expected behavior when an initiatior holds
a persistent registration with a drive and some initiator tries a RESERVE
of that drive?  Does it give a reservation conflict because PERSISTENT
RESERVE and RESERVE don't interplay at all, or since it's just a
registration and not a reservation should it allow the RESERVE?

Thanks,

Kevin D. Butt
IBM Tape Products
SCSI and Fibre Channel Microcode Development
65U/9032-2, 9000 S. Rita Rd.
Tucson, AZ  85744
Phone:  (520)799-5280, Tie-line 321-5280
Fax:  (520)799-4062
Email:  kdbutt at us.ibm.com

*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org



*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org




More information about the T10 mailing list