possible incorrect LOWIR behavior description

Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
Fri Oct 16 14:28:36 PDT 2009


Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r0910160_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>

I am reading SBC-3 rev. 20, table 118 footnote a, a little more closely
today. It says:
"If the entry in the column is “No”, or the LOWIR bit is set to zero in
the
Background Control mode page (see 6.4.3), then the device server shall not
create a Background Medium Scan parameter for the error. If the entry in
the column is “Yes”, and the LOWIR bit is set to one in the Background
Control mode page, then the device server shall create a Background Medium
Scan parameter for the error."
It appears to me that the "yes" and "no" in this footnote should be
interchanged. The description of the LOWIR bit states that all entries
(either recovered or unrecovered) shall be placed in the log when LOWIR=0
but only log the unrecoverable errors when LOWIR=1.
The "yes" entries correspond to the unrecoverable error cases, the "no"
cases are the recovered error cases. I think the correct wordin for the
footnote should be:
"If the entry in the column is “No”, or and the LOWIR bit is set to zero
one in the Background Control mode page (see 6.4.3), then the device server
shall not create a Background Medium Scan parameter for the error. If the
entry in the column is either "no" or “Yes”, and the LOWIR bit is set to
one zero in the Background Control mode page, then the device server shall
create a Background Medium Scan parameter for the error."
If this footnote change isn't made, then the descriptions of the LOWIR bit
in the mode page do not match the footnote. Does anyone disagree with my
interpretation? I would like this item to be on the CAP agenda for the
November T10 meeting.



More information about the T10 mailing list