Pioneer action item

David Burg dburg at nero.com
Thu Oct 27 00:26:32 PDT 2005


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "David Burg" <dburg at nero.com>
*
Hello Ai-san,

Thanks for the clarification.

Sense code 02h asc 04h ascq 01h on subsequent commands, especially TEST UNIT
READY would be no problem.

Best regards,

David.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com [mailto:owner-mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com]
On Behalf Of Takaharu Ai
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:27 AM
To: mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com
Cc: t10 at t10.org
Subject: Re: Pioneer action item

Hello David,


> Checking legacy code, that is, existing non-format layer change code, it
> will be confused by Immed=0 returning 2-4-1 (it will assume that the eject
> failed). This affects multiple applications. But if this is a behavior Mt

I am afraid that you misunderstood Katata-san's question. 
His question did not say the START STOP UNIT command, i.e. non-immediate
LOAD
command, returned 2-0401. The command always return GOOD states except
when the drive fails to close the tray.

The question is that the subsequent command, like TEST UNIT READY
command, will return CHECK CONDITION with 2-4010. The standard does not
request for the drive to wait finishing spining up for LOAD command. His
explanation is one of the implementation style. But returning 2-0401 for
the subsequent command is also one of the ordinary manner.


> failed). This affects multiple applications. But if this is a behavior Mt
> Fuji wants to specify for new format layer change, new code need to be
> written to support format layer change already and could be able to comply
> with Immed=0 returning 2-4-1.

Yes, you are correct. We decided only about the command for Format-layer
change.
But again, please make shure that the Format-layer change request
command specifys to return always GOOD status, not 2-4-1.


Best Regards,

Harry Ai
VEBU
Panasonic AVC Networks Company
Matsushita/Panasonic
Osaka, Japan


---------------- Start of the original message ----------------
>From: David Burg <dburg at nero.com>
>To: mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com, keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp
>Cc: t10 at t10.org
>Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:23:25 +0200
>Subject: FW: Pioneer action item
>
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
> * "David Burg" <dburg at nero.com>
> *
> Dear Katata-san,
> 
> Checking legacy code, that is, existing non-format layer change code, it
> will be confused by Immed=0 returning 2-4-1 (it will assume that the eject
> failed). This affects multiple applications. But if this is a behavior Mt
> Fuji wants to specify for new format layer change, new code need to be
> written to support format layer change already and could be able to comply
> with Immed=0 returning 2-4-1.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> David Burg
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> David Burg
> Senior Engineer
> Standardization and Research
> 
> Nero AG               phone: +49 (0)7248 928 327
> Im Stoeckmaedle 18    fax:   +49 (0)7248 928 299
> 76307 Karlsbad        email: dburg at nero.com
> Germany               http://www.nero.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> 
> *
> * For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
> * 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org

----------------- End of the original message -----------------





*
* 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