[MtFuji] Proposal about A Note

keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp
Tue Oct 14 22:38:27 PDT 2008


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp
*
Hi David,
I checked the information of 3/02/00 that a long time ago my colleague
tested. I
lost the information about 98. A long time ago there were many bad quality
CD-ROM discs. So Read retry worked well.
ME will retry Read command by 3/02/00 5 times. Then total 6 Read command will
be
issued.
2000 is total 2 times, XP total 5 times, Vista unlimited times.
I think 98 might be same with ME.
As you know well, XP/Vista accepts 2/4/7 or 2/4/8.
This is a benefit of using 3/02/00.
Best regards,
Keiji Katata
PIONEER CORP.
David Burg <daviburg at windows.microsoft.com>@avc-pioneer.com on 2008/10/13
01:45:48
mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com$B$KJV?.$7$F$/$@$5$$(B
$BAw?.<T(B:	  owner-mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com
$B08 at h(B:  "mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com" <mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com>
cc:    "t10 at t10.org" <t10 at t10.org>
$B7oL>(B:  RE: [MtFuji] Proposal about A Note
Hello Katata-san, all,
2/04/08 seems to more accurately describe the situation of a logical unit
cannot
perform read operation due to data writing on a
Random writable medium. Also, 2/04/08 is an error that can be returned
quickly,
and for which retry will eventually proceed beyond the current error (i.e.
the
data writing will go away). Accordingly I am not clear why we would use an
apparently less accurate error code. (But they are for sure other conditions
in
which 3/02/00 is appropriate.)
Could you clarify what is the benefit of using 3/02/00 in this long write in
progress situation?
With regards,
David.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com [mailto:owner-mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com] On
Behalf Of keiji_katata at post.pioneer.co.jp
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 1:51 AM
To: mtfuji5 at avc-pioneer.com
Cc: t10 at t10.org
Subject: [MtFuji] Proposal about A Note
Hello all,
This is a proposal about "A Note".
There is a paragraph that talk about host retry on page 708 in Fuji7 rev.
1.10.
-------
Not Ready error may be reported to READ command. For example while writing is
occurring, if READ (10) command or READ (12) command cannot be terminated
immediately due to insufficient buffer capacity, the logical unit may
terminate
the READ command with CHECK CONDITION status, 2/04/07 LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY,
OPERATION IN PROGRESS or 2/04/08 LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, LONG WRITE IN
PROGRESS.
The host shall issue the same READ command again. After logical unit becomes
ready due to sufficient buffer capacity for the READ command, the READ
command
shall be performed normally.
-------
I would like to propose to add this note below this paragraph.
-------
Note: When a logical unit cannot perform read operation due to data writing
on a
Random writable medium, the logical unit may use 3/02/00 NO SEEK COMPLETE
instead of 2/04/07 LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, OPERATION IN PROGRESS or 2/04/08
LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, LONG WRITE IN PROGRESS. It is recommended that host
issue the same READ command again several times. The 3/02/00 NO SEEK COMPLETE
may be used for the actual seek failure. Therefore the number of the retry
may
be limited.
-------
I would like to ask all members following questions.
1. Do you agree to add some note in Fuji7 Rev. 1.10?
2. Do you have any comment to this proposal sentence?
Please send your opinion by November 3.
I would like to ask Bill to share time to discuss this in/after the next MMC.
Best regards,
Keiji Katata
PIONEER CORP.
*
* 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