Request for clarification on SMP_RESPONSE frame

Bill Galloway BillG at breatech.com
Tue Aug 6 21:14:32 PDT 2002


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Bill Galloway" <BillG at breatech.com>
*
David,

This entire section may be replaced with 02-279. We will not know for
sure until the next plenary.

Bill Galloway
BREA Technologies, Inc.
P: (281) 530-3063
F: (281) 988-0358
BillG at breatech.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of David
Freeman
Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 1:29 PM
To: T10 at t10.org
Subject: Request for clarification on SMP_RESPONSE frame


Section 9.4.4.3 of sas-r01 seems to be saying that within the response
bytes, only bytes 48 thru 53 (6 bytes or 48 bits) are needed for the
"ATTACHED SAS TARGET BITMASK". This does not seem right to me. Shouldn't
there be 64 bits in this field.

 

Additionally I think that the "ATTACHED SATA BITMASK" only needs 64 bits
instead of the 176 bits it was allocated. I also think that the "PHY
RATE MULTIBITMASK" needs 64 nibbles (256 bits) instead of the 64 bits
allocated.
 
 
Current
48 - 53        ATTACHED SAS TARGET BITMASK
54 - 75        ATTACHED SATA BITMASK
76 - 83        PHY RATE MULTIBITMASK
84 - 115      FUNCTIONS SUPPORTED BITMASK
 
Proposed 
48 - 55        ATTACHED SAS TARGET BITMASK
56 - 63        ATTACHED SATA BITMASK
64 - 95        PHY RATE MULTIBITMASK
96 - 127      FUNCTIONS SUPPORTED BITMASK
 
Thank You
 
David Freeman
Design Engineer
 
davidf at Data-Transit.com <mailto:davidf at Data-Transit.com> 

*
* 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